BALAK NATH YOGI Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Tapan Singh, Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State.

(2.) This petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, CrPC) has been filed for quashing the chargesheet dated 2.6.2006 and the summoning order dated 13.6.2006 passed in Criminal Case No. 2584/2006, State v. Jai Gopal under Section 147/323/504/506 IPC and 3 (1) 10 of SC & ST Act pending in the Court of CJM, Haridwar.

(3.) Facts, in brief, are that respondent no. 2 lodged an FIR with PS Jawalapur on 24.4.2006 with the averments that on 30.3.2006 at about 7 pm, petitioner Balak Nath along with his four associates which can be identified by him entered in the temple which is under his possession and hurled abuses on him by stating that the said property belongs to him and asked him to leave the said property. When the complainant asked him not to hurl abuses, then he beaten him with the fists. On hearing the noise, Ishwarchand came to save him. Then they also abused him and asked him leave the said property. They also damaged the articles kept inside. Some people of the colony came there and on seeing them, the accused petitioners ran away from the place of occurrence and also taken Rs. 480/- which kept inside the house. On 31.3.2006, when his Advocate came there along with his Munsi, petitioner Balak Nath again intruded into the house and abused the complainant. On this his Advocate called the police by telephone. Police instructed Balak Nath not to visit the said place again but did not take any legal action against any accused. The complainant also gave an application in this regard before the SSP, Haridwar but no action was taken. With these averments, an FIR was lodged by the respondent no. 2. On the basis of this FIR, a case was registered against the petitioners. After the investigation, the I.O. submitted a chargesheet against the petitioners, on the basis of which learned CJM, Haridwar has taken the cognizance of the offence against the petitioners vide order dated 13.6.2006.