RADHA GOBINDA PATRA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') seeking for quashing of the order dtd. 5/7/2012 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Gunupur in I.C.C. No.7 of 2012 taking cognizance of the offences under Ss. 341, 294, 323, 506/34 of IPC and proceeding against the petitioners.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the State-Opposite party no.1. None appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2 to participate in the hearing.

(3.) As it appears, pursuant to the F.I.R. lodged by the present petitioner no.1 prior to the institution of the present complaint case, there was a police investigation vide Gudari P.S. Case No.11 of 2012 which corresponds to G.R. Case No.65 of 2012 on the file of the learned S.D.J.M., Gunupur against the present opposite party no.2 and his relatives alleging commission of offences under Ss. 498-A, 302, 506, 201/34 of IPC read with Sec. 4 of the D.P. Act. After completion of investigation charge-sheet was filed by the police against the opposite party no.2 and the co-accused persons for the aforesaid offences. In the said case it was alleged, inter-alia, by the Informant-Petitioner no.1 that his daughter, who was given in marriage to the opposite party no.2, was subjected to dowry related torture and murdered. Vide the present application, it is alleged by the petitioners that as a counter blast to the aforesaid prosecution, the opposite party no.2 filed a false complaint bearing I.C.C. No.7 of 2012 against them on the accusation that the petitioners went to his house on 30/3/2012, abused and assaulted him with life threat. The learned S.D.J.M. after recording the statement of the complainant (opposite party no.2) under Sec. 200 of Cr.P.C. and the statement of other witnesses in course of enquiry under Sec. 202 Cr.P.C. took cognizance of the offences under Ss. 341, 294, 312, 506/34 of IPC against the petitioners. It is contended by the petitioners that although there is lack of coherence in the statement of the witnesses so examined in the aforesaid complaint case, the learned S.D.J.M. without applying judicial mind and without delving into the veracity of the allegations, passed the impugned order taking cognizance of the offences against the petitioners. They have sought for quashing of the said order hence.