BHUPENDRA PHARASI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both These criminal misc. applications have been preferred by the applicants under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of the charge-sheet dtd. 28/7/2003 as well as the summoning order dtd. 16/10/2003.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that an F.I.R. has been lodged against eight accused persons including present applicants, namely, Bhupender Pharasi and Het Ram, alleging therein that on 23.022003 at bout 11.30 A.M., the accused persons came in the locality of the complainant and set fore huts on fire. Thereafter, the accused persons run away from the spot. The allegation against the applicants prima facie is that they assaulted the wife of complainant. The F.I.R. was registered as Crime No. 45 A of 2003 in respect of offences punishable under Ss. 147, 323 and 436 I.P.C. Matter was investigated and on completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the applicants under the aforesaid Sec. . On submission of charge-sheet, Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance in the matter and summoned the applicants to face trial.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that it is alleged in the F.I.R. that huts of Kamal, Anil, Mahboob and Anita were set on fire, but none of the alleged owner of the huts, namely, Kamal, Anil, Mahboob and Anita have been examined under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. Thus, it is the contention of learned counsel for the applicants that these persons are not in existence. Learned counsel for the applicants would further submit that the summoning order passed by the trial court in respect of offence punishable under Sec. 436 I.P.C. is illegal as from the averments of the F.I.R. no case is made out against the applicants in respect of the said offences.