RAKESH KUMAR MAHOUT Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has preferred this petition for quashing the FIR and charge-sheet registered in Crime No. 106/2020 at Police Station Chirmiri, District-Koriya, C.G. under Sec. 509 of the IPC against the petitioner.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is an Advocate by profession and practicing in Civil Court, Chirmiri, District-Koriya since more than 20 years and he is a renowned person in his fraternity. The petitioner suggested his client Janki Nag to lodge FIR against the respondent No. 2, if she commits any crime, and ultimately the FIR has been registered against the respondent No. 2 on the basis of complaint, hence due to revenge, the respondent No. 2 made a false and vague complaint against the petitioner, knowing the fact that he is a practicing Advocate and is in the capacity to suggest his client to settle the differences by compromise with respondent No. 2. When the petitioner came to know that a false complaint has been made against him by the respondent No. 2, he immediately made a complaint to rebut the whole allegation levelled against him, copy of complaint made by the petitioner to rebut the allegation was sent to police station Chirmiri, Superintendent of Police, Collector and other higher authorities. Copy of complaint made by the petitioner is enclosed herewith as Annexure-P/2. The petitioner never met the respondent No. 2, and he does not know her, he suggested his client as per law, but respondent No. 2, satisfy her grievance, has made a false allegation against the petitioner as stated in FIR. Further the offence of 509 of IPC stipulated Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman and the crime with regard to 509 of IPC is not made out against the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner filed this petition for quashing the FIR registered in Crime No. 106/2020 and further proceeding pending against him.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner directly or indirectly has nothing to do with the crime or the respondent No. 2, even the petitioner is not known to the respondent No. 2, she made a false and vague allegation against the petitioner. He next submits that the petitioner being an Advocate suggested his client Janki Nag to make a complaint against the respondent No. 2, and on the basis of said complaint, the FIR has been registered against the respondent No. 2 therefore she made a complaint against the petitioner with intention to compel the petitioner to undue influence his client to settle the dispute with the respondent No. 2, Copy of FIR registered against the respondent No. 2 and her relatives in Crime No. 14/2020 at P.S. AJAK, District-Baikunthpur is filed herewith as Annexure-P/3. He lastly submits that the petitioner being an Advocate, acted professionally as per instruction of his client cannot be prosecuted, therefore the impugned FIR and subsequent charge-sheet filed against him and criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed. He has placed his reliance upon the decision of this Court in the matter of Arun Thakur Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others passed in CRMP No. 1984/2018 vide order dtd. 10/5/2019.