ANIL MANOHAR WALKE Vs. PRAMOD UTTAMRAO TIDKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P.S.Patil, Adv. for the Applicant and Mr. R.J.Mirza, Adv. for the Respondent.

(2.) By way of instant application, the applicant has prayed for to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order in Criminal Revision No.109 of 2009, dt.19.6.2010 whereby the learned 4 th Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati was pleased to quash and set aside the order regarding framing of charge against the accused u/s. 506 of the Indian Penal Code in Regular Criminal Case No.218 of 2006.

(3.) It appears that Criminal Complaint Case No.218 of 2006 was filed by the present applicant in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amravati against Nandkishor Vishwanath Raut (reportedly dead) and Pramod Uttamrao Tidke (sole respondent) alleging that, on 10.3.2006, the applicant was abused as "Nalayaka" by Nandkishor Raut (deceased) and the present respondent Pramod Tidke threatened the applicant not to depose and submit documents as evidence before the Enquiry Officer. It may be noted that, in the enquiry in respect of complaint made by certain students to the Director of vocational Education and Training, Mumbai, the present applicant was summoned to give his statement and documentary evidence. This fact gave rise to the incident, as alleged by the applicant (Original complainant). The applicant had to lodge a complaint dt.10.3.2006 reporting about the incident to City Kotwali Police Station, Amravati against both the accused. The Police Station had not taken cognizance of the complaint. Therefore, the applicant was constrained to file private complaint which was registered as Criminal Complaint Case No.218 of 2006, in which verification of the complainant was recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amravati at Exh.9. The learned Magistrate, who perused the complaint and evidence led by the witnesses, after hearing the learned Counsel for the complainant, issued process for the offence punishable u/ss.294 and 506-I of the Indian Penal Code. Pursuant to the order of issuance of process dt.23.7.2007, the respondent/accused appeared in the proceedings. After recording the evidence before charge, the learned trial Magistrate, by a reasoned order dt.5.3.2009, decided to frame charge against the respondent for an offence punishable u/s.506 of the Indian Penal Code after recording satisfaction on the ground that giving threat by the accused to cause injury is sufficient to frame charge u/s.506 of the Indian Penal Code. The order was challenged in Criminal Revision No.109 of 2009, which was set aside by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.