CHAND AHUJA Vs. GAUTAM HADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhatinda, dated 11-3-1989, whereby charge under Sections 385 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code was directed to be framed against the present petitioner and his other two co-accused namely Lalit Ahuja and ASI Sukhminder Singh.

(2.) IN brief, Chand Ahuja the present petitioner who was partner of M/s Mulkh Raj Madan Mohan, Commission Agents, Bhatinda (hereinafter referred to as the Firm) had lodged First Information Report with the police under sections 420 and 406 IPC against the present respondents and others who were Directors and Executives of M/s Rama Fibres Ltd., New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Company). During the investigation of that case, the present petitioner and his brother Lalit Ahuja and two other persons and ASI Sukhminder Singh went to the office of Company and arrested Anil Hada and R.K. Gupta and hunted for other co-accused on the plea that warrants of arrest had been issued against all of them. The present petitioner demanded Rs. 5.35 lacs in cash for settling the case and threatened that in the alternative the police would take Anil Hada and R. K. Gupta to Punjab. The complainant then arranged a draft of Rs. 3.5 lacs from the current account of his own firm namely M/s Hada Leasing and Industries Ltd. in favour of the aforesaid firm. The police got the remand of Shri Anil Hada and R. K. Gupta to be produced at Bhatinda. On 10-12-1985 the accused petitioner and Lalit Ahuja and some others approached the complainant at 10.00 A. M. when they were standing outside the Kotwali Bhatinda and threatened them to deliver the draft, otherwise Anil Hada and R. K. Gupta would not be bailed out; would be remanded to police custody and paraded through the main bazar in handcuffs. The complainant refused to deliver the draft. ASI Sukhminder Singh then took Anil Hada and R. K. Gupta on foot from Police Station Kotwali Bhatinda to the Courts at Bhatinda which caused further humiliation to the arrested persons. It was also alleged that in the Court ASI Sukhminder Singh threw open challenge that in case draft was not handed over Anil Hada and R. K. Gupta would be remanded to police custody for 10 days and in order to avoid harassment to them the present complainant handed over a draft of Rs. 3.5. lacs to the present petitioner.

(3.) ON behalf of the accused-petitioner it was mainly submitted that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, in his impugned order, has not specifically applied his mind or referred to the evidence produced by the complainant, on the basis of which he came to the conclusion that a prima facie case under section 385/506 IPC appeared to be made out against the accused.