YAQOOB Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal application, preferred u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed for quashing the charge sheet, impugned cognizance order dated 29.5.2006 and the entire proceedings in Criminal Case No.269 of 2006 (Old No.1412/2006), State Vs. Yakoob, U/s 420/504/506 IPC, pending before II Addl. Civil Judge (J.D.) Roorkee, District Haridwar.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. In brief, the facts of the case are that respondent no.3 lodged an FIR on 18.1.2006 with the averments that she is the Pradhan of Village Panchayat Mirjapur Mustafabad and the petitioner runs a fair price shop in the village. Some ration holders, namely, Noor Hassan, Shamsher, Salim and Mujammil and others informed her that they were not getting the essential commodities on their ration cards since the month of Sep-Oct, 2005 and the reason stated by the petitioner was that the essential commodities were not been issued to him from Government Godown. When the respondent no.3 made an enquiry in the office of Regional Food & Supply Inspector, Roorkee, she was informed that the petitioner was regularly taking out the essential commodities. When she saw the signatures and the seal thereon, the same were found having forged signatures and seal. It was further stated that the petitioner has forged the signatures and seal and thereby received the essential commodities and sold it in the black market and the petitioner also threatened the respondent no.3. After that the matter was investigated and after completing the investigation, the I.O. filed the charge sheet against the petitioner on the basis of which the learned J.M. Ist Class, Roorkee vide order dated 29.5.2006 took cognizance and summoned the petitioner u/s 420/504/506 IPC. Hence this petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that no offence is made out against him and the court below has wrongly summoned him. I do not find any force in this argument for the reason that on a perusal of the FIR lodged by the respondent no.3, the statements of the complainant Smt. Mehruba and witnesses Noor Hassan, Shamsher, Salim, Mujammil and others recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C., I find that the offences punishable u/s 420/504/506 IPC are prima facie made out against the petitioner on the basis of the above-said discussion and the trial court has accordingly rightly summoned the petitioner to face trial.