RANGASWAMY Vs. N. MANJUNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner approached this Court and sought for quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C. No. 9/2014 pending on the file of Civil Judge & JMFC at K.R. Pet.

(2.) RESPONDENT herein being the complainant, lodged a private complaint in PCR No. 2/2013 making certain allegations against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 217, 218, 219, 323, 324, 341 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. On the basis of such complaint, the learned Magistrate took cognizance and recorded the sworn statement of the complainant and thereafter came to the conclusion that there are sufficient materials to issue process against the accused and accordingly vide order dated 06.01.2014 the learned Magistrate issued process against the accused, petitioner herein. The said order is in question before this Court.

(3.) IN this background, the complaint averments is seen. The complaint averments disclose that the respondent herein also lodged a complaint in Crime No. 225/2012 for various offences under the Indian Penal Code. A counter case appears to have also been filed by the above said party in Crime No. 226/2012 before the K.R. Pet City Police Station in which the present petitioner was working as a Police Sub Inspector. It is the allegation that in order to favour one of the parties in Crime No. 226/2012, the petitioner alleged to have forced the complainant in Crime No. 225/2012 to give further statement so as to file the charge sheet and also to change the provisions of law under Section 384 of IPC. He also declined to change the provisions of law from 384 of IPC to 392 of IPC. In this regard, it is also alleged that the accused caught hold the neck of the complainant and abused him in filthy language. At this stage, I do not want to make any observation so far as the factual aspects are concerned. It would suffice to say that all those allegations traversed in the complaint are subject to contest before the Trial Court. The documents produced before this Court though relevant but at this stage, in my opinion while exercising the powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., this Court cannot rely upon those documents for the purpose of quashing the entire proceedings. The private complaint is to be dealt by the learned Magistrate in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code as contemplated under Sections 244 and 245 before framing the charges against the accused. In a criminal complaint, the complainant has to lead evidence before framing of the charges against the accused persons. The complainant has to be examined himself and he has to examine all the witnesses on his side and produce all the materials he proposes, at the time of giving evidence under Section 244 of Cr.P.C. In that context, the accused has also got opportunity to counter those evidence and also documents produced and if necessary during the course of cross examination, witnesses can also be confronted with the documents produced by the accused. Thereafter the learned Magistrate on overall analysis of the entire materials on record, consider the case of the prosecution and then pass an order either framing charges against the accused or to discharge the accused.