SANJEEV TIWARI Vs. ASHOK SINGH TOMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr. P.C. for quashing the order dated 28.07.2009 passed by learned J. M.F.C. Bhind in case No.1067/2009 whereby the cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 294,341,500 and 506-B of I.P.C. and also bailable warrant has been issued against the petitioner.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that, The respondent / complainant has filed a private complaint before the J.M.F.C. Bhind, alleging that he is a social and political worker. On 12.05.2007 at about 8:30 P.M., the complainant along with his brother Binod Singh and four others were coming back form marriage ceremony. When he reached near Ater turn at about a distance of four kilometers from Pratappura, S.H.O. Ater, Sanjeev Tiwari, who was standing at the side of the road, signalled the complainant to stop the vehicle. As soon as, the complainant stopped the vehicle, Sanjeev Tiwari started abusing the complainant and lodging false allegation on complainant of committing robbery. The licensee gun of complainant and his brother has been snatched and search was also taken. When complainant and his brother have shown their gun license, thereafter, Sanjeev Tiwari returned back their license papers and guns. Sanjeev Tiwari also threatened to involve the complainant and his brother and their associates under Dacoity Acts. It is further alleged that Sanjeev Tiwari has tarnished the image of the complainant and his brother by making abuses and false allegations and threatening to involve in a false case, as a result of which the prestige of the complainant has been tarnished in the eyes of the society. The complainant made a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Bhind and also to higher authorities but no action has been taken. Hence, filed private complaint in the Court of J.M.F.C. Bhind. Learned J.M.F.C. Bhind after recording the statement under Section 200 and 202 of Cr. P.C. has taken cognizance against the petitioner and issued bailable warrant for his presence. Being aggrieved this petition has been filed.

(3.) It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order is illegal and arbitrary. The learned J.M.F.C. has not taken into consideration the provisions of Section 197 of Cr. P.C. which creates bar and sanction of prosecution is required. The F.I.R. does not disclose the commission of offence. Therefore, the prosecution of the petitioner amounts to abuse of process of law. It is further submitted that the complainant is a history-sheeter. It is prayed that the order whereby cognizance has been taken against the petitioner and issuance of nonbailable warrant be quashed.