STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Vs. DEEPAK DORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner is questioning the legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 08.01.2013 passed by the Sessions Judge in unregistered Criminal Revision affirming the order dated 26.10.2012 passed in Criminal Case No.418/2012 (Old No.786/2009) by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raigarh whereby the application filed by the Petitioner/State under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Cr.P.C.) seeking withdrawal of the prosecution in Crime No.265/2008 registered in Police Station Chakradharnagar, Raigarh, in connection with offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 506-B, 427, 332, 186, 353 and 336 IPC has been rejected.

(2.) Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, learned Deputy Advocate General for the Petitioner/State submits that the order impugned as passed by the Courts below refusing to grant permission for withdrawal of the prosecution under Section 321 of the Cr.P.C. by observing that in order to closure of the prosecution, it is required to be established by the prosecution that sufficient evidence is not available to bring home the guilt of the accused persons and in absence thereof, the application cannot be allowed, is not sustainable. According to him, the said application, which has been made by the Assistant District Public Prosecutor after applying his mind, ought not to have been refused unless the Court comes to the conclusion that he did not apply his mind bona fidely. He submits further that the said provision nowhere provides that an application for withdrawal of the prosecution should necessarily be made only if the evidence is of weak in nature and not sufficient to establish the prosecution case. Further contention of Shri Gupta is that the evidence collected by the Investigating Agency and produced before the Court is not sufficient to convict the accused persons. The order impugned is, therefore, liable to be set aside and instead the application filed under Section 321 of the Cr.P.C. seeking withdrawal of the prosecution be allowed. In support, he placed his reliance upon the decision rendered in the matter of Ramesh Kumar Sharma & Anr. vs. State of C.G. & Others reported in, 2016 3 CgLJ 1.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the entire papers annexed with this petition carefully.