CHATTAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is instituted for setting aside the Government Orders dated 08.07.2015 and 10.08.2015 passed by the Government of Uttarakhand and also to set aside order dated 06.06.2016 passed by learned Sessions Judge in revision petitions no.31 of 2015 and no.15 of 2015.

(2.) Key facts, necessary for adjudication of this petition, are that the petitioner had gone to Shiva Resort with his wife, member of Zila Panchayat, on 16.01.2013. Byelection for the Zila Panchayat, District Bijnor was scheduled for 21.01.2013. On 17/18.01.2013 at around 02:30 AM, when the petitioner was at the Resort, a mob came at the spot. The panchayat members along with the petitioner were pushed into the waiting cars and kidnapped and taken to an isolated place without their consent. F.I.R. dated 18.01.2013 was registered under Sections 452, 365, 342, 504, 506, 323 and 34 of IPC. Charge sheet was filed on 26.05.2014. Supplementary charge sheet was also filed on 07.02.2015. On 07.06.2014, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, in criminal case no.445 of 2014, has taken the cognizance against the accused and summons were issued. However, the accused did not appear before the court. Thereafter, on 25.04.2015, cognizance was taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate against the accused in criminal case no.230 of 2015. Both the cases, i.e., criminal case no.445 of 2014 and criminal case no.230 of 2015 were clubbed together. The fact of the matter is that the State Government vide G.O. No.183/XX-3/08(2014) dated 08.07.2015 issued directions for withdrawing the case titled as "State vs. Amit Chauhan". Copy of the G.O. is Annexure5. Thereafter, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor filed an application to withdraw the case instituted against accused Amit Chauhan.

(3.) According to the averments made in the petition, the accused is a son of the Minister of U.P. The withdrawal application was rejected by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal, on 12.08.2015. Thereafter, the State Government issued another Government Order being No.713/XX-3-2015-08(104)2014 dated 10.08.2015 to withdraw the crime no.2 of 2013 against the accused persons in public interest, modifying the earlier Government Order dated 08.07.2015. Thereafter, the Assistant Public Prosecutor filed an application being no.35-B to withdraw the case against the accused in criminal case no.445 of 2014. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, vide order dated 21.09.2015, rejected the said application. Thereafter, the learned District Government Counsel moved a revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal. Vide order dated 06.06.2016, the learned Sessions Judge allowed the revision. It would be relevant at this stage to mention that the learned Sessions Judge had issued notice to the S.H.O. Police Station Laxmanjhula in the revision petition. The S.H.O. appeared before the court and filed his written submissions and opposed the withdrawal of the case against the accused. The copy of the written submissions is Annexure-13. The petitioner herein also has filed objections against the withdrawal of the case. However, his objections were not considered by the learned Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge, in his judgment dated 06.06.2016, while allowing the revision petition no.31/2015, has stated that there was no gravity of offence as both the parties were of the same place and belong to different political parties thus, the public interest at large would not be affected. He set aside the impugned order dated 21.09.2015 and permitted the prosecution to withdraw the case no.445 of 2014, and in the revision petition no.15/2015, he set aside the summoning order dated 25.04.2015 passed in criminal case no.230 of 2015.