DAOLI RAM Vs. SHIV DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Sections 482 and 483 Cr. P.C. has been filed by the petitioner -complainant (hereinafter referred to as the Complainant) praying for quashing the order dated 27.2.1997 passed in Criminal Revision No. 8/1994 by the learned Session Judge, Bilaspurand order dated 13.4.1994 in complaint No. 168/1 of 1992 passed by learned Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ghumarwin. By the latter order the learned Magistrate has dismissed a complaint filed by the complainant under Sections 500, 323, 506, 341 IPC and Section 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act; by the former order the learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the revision preferred by the complainant against the aforesaid order of the trial Magistrate.

(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records.

(3.) The complainant has preferred the said complaint against the respondents -accused (here -in -after referred to as the accused) on the allegations that he had some bargaining with accused Shiv Dayal about two buffaloes and such bargaining was denied by the complainant on the ground that he had borrowed said buffaloes from the wife of said complainant and not from him. Said accused Shiv Dayal, therefore, filed a complaint No. 184 -1/1992 before the Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur which was marked to second accused A.S.I. Jagdish for investigation about the alleged offence of mis -appropriation or cheating about the bargain concerning the buffaloes by the present complainant. In the present complaint the complainant has further alleged that at the behast of accused Shiv Dayal accused Jagdish ASI severally beat him up and his son on 12.7.1992 at the police Station Ghumarwin and called him "BEHNCHOD CHORE BADMAS TO SHIV DAYAL KIAURAT KE SATH FASHA HEI AAJ MAIN TERI GAND MARUNGA AUR TOO CHORE DAGI CHAMAR HAI MAIN TUJHE NAHIN CHORUNGA". Accused Jagdish who is alleged to be drunk at the relevant time hurled some other filthy abuses also. The complainant was thereafter detained by accused Jagdish in connivance with accused Shiv Dayal. Hence, the present complaint filed by the complainant wherein after recording the preliminary evidence accused persons were summoned under Sections 500,323,506 and 341 IPC and Section 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. After securing the presence of the accused persons the trial Court proceeded to record pre -charge evidence. After hearing the parties on charge the trial Magistrate found that the ingredients of the offences complained against were not made out, therefore, he dismissed the complaint.