JAGAT RAM Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) <DJG>Dharam Veer, J.</DJG> Heard Mr. MC Kandpal, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. SS Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State/respondents no. 1 & 2.

(2.) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, CrPC), the petitioners have prayed for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Complaint Case No. 447 of 2004, Ranjeet Singh v. Jagat Ram under Section 504/506 IPC pending before the Court of CJM, Almora and the order dated 17.7.2004 and 15.3.2005 passed by the CJM, Almora.

(3.) Facts, in brief, are that a case was lodged against the petitioners by the respondent no. 3 Ranjeet Singh Rawat wherein Rajendra Nath, Jeevan Singh, Khim Singh and Gopal Singh were shown to be eyewitnesses of the alleged incident. Statements of the aforesaid eyewitnesses named in the FIR were also recorded by the I.O. during the course of investigation, who have supported the version made in the FIR. But after the investigation, the Patwari and I.O. of the case submitted a final report on 30.10.2000. Against the said final report, respondent no. 3 filed a protest petition enclosing therewith the affidavits of eyewitnesses Jeevan Singh and Rajendra Singh. On the basis of this, the CJM, Almora rejected the final report and directed for reinvestigation by some other Investigation Officer or by some senior officer. After the reinvestigation, Patwari again submitted a final report and submitted a chalani report against the complainant Ranjeet Singh under Section 182 IPC, against which the complainant/respondent no. 3 filed his objections. Thereafter the CJM, Almora on the basis of the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 CrPC and the case diary, quashed the proceedings under Section 182 IPC against the complainant/respondent no. 3 and rejected the final report vide order dated 17.7.2004 and observed that on the basis of the aforesaid statements and the case diary, a prima facie case under Section 504 and 506(2) IPC is made out against the petitioners and accordingly summoned the petitioners. Revision against the aforesaid order dated 17.7.2004 was also dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Almora vide his order dated 1.2.2005. Thereafter when the petitioners did not appear before the trial court after service of the summons on them, bailable warrants were issued against the petitioners by the order dated 15.3.2005.