MOHD SIDDIQUE Vs. ABDUL SATTAR COMPLAINT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has been summoned under Section 392, Indian Penal Code, read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, and later charged under sections 392, 342 and 506 Indian Penal Code and the Orders in question are Annexures 3 and 11411 .He has come forward with a prayer that the complaint may be quashed. Affidavit was filed in support of the same. Counter- affidavit has been filed, rejoinder-affidavit was also given and a supplementary-affidavit has also been filed.

(2.) The first point, as also taken in the application, was that the statements under Sections 200 and 202, Criminal Procedure Code, do not tally and it was further urged that only one witness was examined under section 202, Criminal Procedure Code. The matter stands completely resolved by the latest pronouncement of the Supreme Court in Delhi Municipality v. Ram Kishan reiterating the principles laid down in earlier Supreme Court pronouncements starting with the leading case of R. P. Kapoor. This Court in the exercise of its inherent powers will simply consider whether the materials before the Magistrate, i.e. complaint and the statements under sections 200 and 202, Criminal Procedure Code, if any disclose a prima fade case. It cannot function as a court of fact to scrutinise the evidence, nor will it consider as to what defence the other side may be taking. When that is the position, the aforesaid ground urged by the applicants counsel has no force.

(3.) It was next urged that actually the Magistrate first summoned under section 392/34, Indian Penal Code, but later modified that order as to add certain other sections also. I may at the very out set observe that Annexure 11411 refers to framing of the charge. True that the applicant was summoned under section 392/34, Indian Penal Code only, but any charges concerning any offences could be framed. In fact, the powers are so wide that even after framing of the charge before the pronouncement of judgment the court can modify and add other charges. So this second ground also would not prevail.