JANAK RAJ RANA Vs. ABHIMANYU SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Janak Raj Rana the petitioner is a Postman working in the Post Office Sector-19, Chandigarh and he owns House No. 282 Mohalla Gujjranwala, Burail, Union Territory, Chandigarh. He has come forward with the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging a summoning order dated 28.7.1993 passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chandigarh in a complaint for offence under Sections 379, 380, 441 and 451 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The petitioner has alleged that Abhimanyu Singh respondent Head Constable had been his tenant; that the respondent was in arrears of rent and never paid charges of electricity and water; that whenever the respondent got an opportunity he made false allegations against the petitioner as well as his visiting relatives as if they were terrorists and took advantage of his position being a Head Constable; that ultimately the petitioner approached some senior officers of the Police Department and on 29.3.1992 a compromise Annexure P-1 was arrived at. The respondent in a complaint alleged that on 28.9.1992 at about 5.30 P.M. when he went to the premises he found that the locks of the room which was in his possession were open and thereafter, he saw that his house-hold articles which were lying in a box were missing. The complainant examined Jasbir Singh and Behal Singh in support of the allegations and the petitioner has been summoned for offences under Sections 379, 380, 441 and 451 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that a perusal of the daily dairy report No. 34 dated 31.7.1992 recorded at Police Station South, Chandigarh Annexure P-3 shows that on 7.8.1992 the Head Constable received Rs. 1000/- from the petitioner-Postman and agreed to hand over possession on 15.8.1992; that by now he has shifted and residing as a tenant in the premises of Shri Jit Singh Contractor at Burail in Union Territory, Chandigarh and the present complaint of theft of house-hold articles has been lodged only to harass the present petitioner.