NAND KISHORE PATEL Vs. MAMTA BAI AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashment of the complaint case filed on behalf of the first respondent against the applicant registered under Section 323 IPC and subsequently also registered under Section 3(1)(x) and (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "the Act of 1989") and also under Section 354 IPC.

(2.) The contention of Shri Rajneesh Patel, learned counsel for the applicant is that the entire case is concocted in order to meet out the FIR lodged by the applicant against the first respondent and her husband and in order to save their skin from the prosecution, a false case was submitted before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Damoh and which has also been registered under the aforesaid provisions. Learned counsel submits that the applicant himself has lodged a report against the first respondent and her husband Maganlal on 7.12.2007 at Post Chowki, Narsinghpur, District Damoh, which was reduced in Roznamcha No.118. On the basis of the said Roznamcha, the concerning Police Station Damoh (Dehat) registered a case on 9.12.2007 at Crime No.495/2007 against the first respondent and her husband under Section 324 IPC. The applicant was also sent for medical examination in which the doctor has found a lacerated wound 3"x 1/2" x 1/4" at the centre of head which was caused by hard and sharp object. The applicant was also sent for radiological examination but no bony injury was found. Learned counsel has also invited my attention to the entire charge-sheet which has been filed in the aforesaid crime registered at the instance of the applicant against the first respondent and her husband. Hence, it has been prayed that this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. be allowed and the complaint case which has been registered against the applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 323 and 354 IPC and also under Section 3(1)(x) and (xi) of the Act of 1989 be quashed.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 submitted that because the case was not registered upon the report lodged by the complainant, therefore, no option was left for her except to file a private complaint. It has also been put forth by her that the applicant being an influential person has managed to get the case registered against the respondent No.1 and her husband and therefore, the complaint cannot be quashed.