LAWS(GAU)-2003-7-15

ASOM KUMAR DAS Vs. NILIMA RAJBONGSHI

Decided On July 18, 2003
ASOM KUMAR DAS Appellant
V/S
NILIMA RAJBONGSHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing the proceeding of CR Case No. 360/96 under Sections 354/506 of the IPC pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Class, Nalbari as well as orders passed therein. This Court vide order dated 5/6/1997 admitted the revision petition and had stayed further proceedings of other aforementioned complaint case.

(2.) I have heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. P. Bhomik, for the petitioner. None appears for the opp. party. The ordersheet discloses that after Rule was issued, notice was duly addressed to the opp. party. Office note indicates that notice was served on the opp. party. In spite of the above, none has entered appearance on her behalf.

(3.) The factual background, in short, leading to the filing of the case has to beset out to appreciate the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner at the time of approaching this court was serving as Executive Engineer, PWD (R & D) in the office of the Chief Engineer (Roads), Assam, Chandmari, Gauhati-3. Before that, he was posted as the Executive Engineer, PWD (Building Division), Balbari from 8/9/1992 to 26/6/1996. He was transferred to Gauhati on 27/6/1996. The opp. party was a contractor under the Nalbari, (Building Division), P.W.D. On 20/8/1996 a complaint was lodged by her in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalbari which was registered as Case No. 360C/96. It was alleged therein that on 24/10/1995 the complainant was called to his (petitioner) residence with regard to the payment of her bills. When she reached the residence of the petitioner, the latter asked her to pay a sum of Rs. 1000.00 as gratification to clear her bills. It was alleged that the amount was paid, whereafter the petitioner tried to outrage her modesty. He threatened her not to disclose the matter or otherwise her due bill amount would not be released. It is noticeable that though the date of occurrence was on 24/10/1995, the complaint was filed on 20/8/1996. The complaint, however, disclosed that, the husband of the complainant, meanwhile had died. On the same date, she was examined by the court in which she, inter alia, stated that on being called by the petitioner she paid Rs. 1000.00 on 28/10/1995 at the Nalbari Inspection Bungalow. Thereafter the petitioner called her to his residence saying that he would issue a cheque there. Instead of delivering any cheque to her, the petitioner pulled her and misbehaved with her. She stated that while she was coming out from the residence she saw on Tarini Seal at the doorway. Another witness, Ashok Das was examined on the very same day. The learned trial court thereafter on 16/9/1996 issued process under Sections 354/506 of the IPC.