SATISH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This C482 application is directed against the judgment and order dtd. 26/2/2015, passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Revision No.105 of 2014, Satish Kumar vs. Ajay Kumar Singh and others, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge while rejecting the criminal revision affirmed the judgment and order dtd. 5/10/2013, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No.163 of 2012, Satish Kumar vs. Ajay Kumar Singh and others, whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar while accepting the Final Report No.6 of 2012, dtd. 30/3/2012, submitted by the Investigating Officer took cognizance against the applicant-Satish Kumar under Sec. 182 IPC, on the recommendation, so made by the Investigating Officer and issued summons to the applicant to face the trial fixing a date of appearance on 31/10/2013.

(2.) The facts, which resulted into filing of the present C482 application, in short, are that the first information report was lodged by applicant-Satish Kumar on the basis of which, a chick FIR was lodged in Police Station SIDCUL Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar on 22/3/2012 at about 09:20 p.m., on the basis of which a Case Crime No.14 of 2012 (FIR No.27 of 2012) under Ss. 307, 120-B, 324, 323, 504 and 506 IPC was registered against respondent nos.2 and 3 and two other unknown persons.

(3.) In the first information report, it is alleged by the applicant-informant that respondent no.2-Ajay Kumar Singh, Company Officer of M/s Dukes Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.2, SIDCUL, Pantnagar got executed the work of plumbering and drain, sewer line of the entire factory from the applicant 5 years back and a sum of Rs.1,87,000.00 was due for this work, which was not being paid by respondent no.2-Ajay Kumar Singh and owner of the factory, respondent no.3-Vikas Agrawal. On 16/2/2012, at about 06:30 p.m., the applicant was going to SIDCUL from Rudrapur riding on a cycle, suddenly, ahead of Marviya Band in front of orchard, the respondents along with two associates intercepted him and respondent no.2-Ajay Kumar Singh, on the instigation of respondent no.3-Vikas Agarwal, in order to kill the applicant committed marpeet with him by legs and fists and hurled abused at him. According to their conspiracy, respondent no.2 inflicted a blow on the applicant, by taking out a sword from the vehicle, with intention to kill him, by which, his head was ruptured; he fell on the ground; respondent no.2 again assaulted him and his right hand was cut. It is further alleged in the first information report that on hearing the noise and commotion, nearby people and commuters reached on the spot and on seeing the people coming, respondent no.2 and his accomplice fled from the scene threatening the applicant that today, if he survived, he shall be killed on getting any chance.