SUKHPAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VINOD Prasad, J. Four applicants Sukhpal, Sanju alias Sanjeev, Jeete and Sonu, all the residents of village Kushawali, P. S. Sardhana, District Meerut have invoked inherent power of this Court under Section 482 Cr. P. C. with the prayer of quashing of criminal proceedings pending against them being Criminal Case No. 521/9 of 2005, State v. Sukhpal and Ors. , under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506, 307 and 392 IPC, P. S. Sardhana, District Meerut. The ancillary prayer is for stay of further proceedings of the aforesaid case pendente lite.

(2.) THE factual matrix encapsulated, as is perceptible from the pleadings is that the respondent No. 2 Bhawar Singh filed an application under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. (application No. 182/2005) before the Judicial Magistrate, Sardhana, District Meerut, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506, 307 and 392 IPC, with the allegation that he and the present applicants were the resident of village Kushawali. He was a farmer and peace-loving citizen, whereas the applicants were quarrel some persons. A drain was bone of contention between them hankering inter-se enmity. On 12-6-2005 at 6 p. m. respondent No. 2 Bhawar Singh and his brother Chandra Pal were returning, on a tractor, after dumping wheat in the house of his another brother Bhopal Singh and when they reached near Madaiya Ki Paith, applicant No. 1 armed with Soth, applicant No. 2 armed with Farsa and applicants Nos. 3 and 4 armed with lathies, forcibly stopped the tractor pulled down Chandra Pal and belaboured him because of aforesaid animosity. On hue and cry being raised, witnesses Ghanshyam, Gajendra and Sanjiv and many passers by assembled and saved his brother Chandra Pal otherwise he would have been done to death. THE assailant while escaping, committed robbery of Rs. 1,500/-from them and also threatened them to desist from lodging the FIR otherwise they will be implicated in a false case. Bhawar Singh brought injured to Pyarey Lal Sharma Hospital Meerut where, finding his condition to be grievous, he was admitted in emergency after giving first aid as doctor found his injuries dangerous to life. After being admitted in emergency for 24 hours, he was discharged on 13-6-2005. Respondent No. 2 sent a telegrame to SSP, Meerut that day itself and endeavoured, in vain, to get his report lodged. No other way being in sight he wielded the power of the Magistrate through an application under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. Annexure 1),on 1-7-2005,appending therewith the copy of telegrame sent to the SSP, Meerut, copy of the application sent to the DIG, Meerut, alongwith the medical report, discharge slip and X-ray report of the injured Chandra Pal with the prayer that the police of P. S. Sardhana be directed to take action against culprits by registering FIR. Under the orders of the Magistrate, the FIR Crime No. 11 of 2005, under Sections 323, 324, 307, 504, 506 and 392 IPC Annexure 2) was registered at police station Sardhana District Meerut on 8-7-2005 at 5. 00 p. m. against the applicants. THE medical examination of the injured, dated 12-6-2005 shows two incised wounds on his head for which X-ray was advised but no fracture vas detected under the injury. THE police during the course of investigation recorded the statement of respondent No. 2 Bhawar Singh (informant), Dr. K. K. Karauli (who had examined the injured), Chandra Pal (injured), and witnesses Ghanshyam, Gajendra Singh and Sanjiv, who all supported the allegation of assault made by the applicants. Two other persons, Pratap and Hemant alias Hem Singh, however, did not support the prosecution case. After recording the said statements, the I. O. opined the incident to be false and consequently submitted a final report on 14-8-2005 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Sardhana. THE informant, respondent No. 2 filed a detailed protest petition against acceptance of the final report on 14-12-2005 mentioning therein that the IO, ignoring the injuries and the statements of the injured and other witnesses had submitted the final report and therefore he prayed that the FIR be rejected and the accused be summoned. Alongwith the protest petition he appended his affidavit and the affidavits of witnesses. Judicial Magistrate, Sardhana on 23-12-2005 rejected the final report and took cognizance under Section 190 (1) (b) Cr. P. C. and summoned the applicants under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506, 307 and 392 IPC, and directed that the case be tried as a State Case as a warrant trial and fixed 6-2-2006 for appearance of the accused persons, the present applicants.

(3.) SRI Chaturvedi firstly contended that the case is absolutely false. No visible injury of lathi was found on the person of the injured, therefore, the two applicants alleged to be armed with lathi have been falsely implicated. Secondly he contended that the injuries of the injured has been found to be simple in the nature, therefore, summoning of the applicants under Section 307 IPC is bad in law. He further argued that the allegation of robbery was found to be false and therefore, no offence under Section 392 IPC is made out and lastly he contended that final report was correctly submitted by the investigating officer. Alongwith the protest petition, affidavits of witnesses were filed, which had also been taken into consideration by the learned Magistrate while summoning the applicants, and therefore, it should be presumed that the Magistrate adopted the procedure of complaint case and consequently, without recording the statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr. P. C. , of all the witnesses of the complainant, the proceedings against the applicants is bad in law. On the basis of aforementioned submissions he concluded, by submitting that the whole procedure adopted by the trial Court is without any application of the mind and against the provisions of Section 200 and 202 Cr. P. C. and is void, and the present application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. should be allowed and the prosecution of the applicants be quashed.