AMAR DUTT AND OTHERS Vs. BABLI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only question, needs adjudication in this petition, is that the complaint of which cognizance has been taken by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Rampur, was time barred and as such the impugned order dated 27.5.2013 is not legally and factually sustainable.

(2.) Complainant Smt. Babli Devi wife of Ram Lal is a member of scheduled caste community. On 6.8.1975, the Government had sanctioned Nautor land, measuring 5 Bighas, bearing Khasra No. 296/2, situate in village Konthroo, Tehsil KUmarsain, District Shimla, under H.P. Utilization of Surplus Area Scheme, 1974, in the name of her father-in-law Shri Parma Nand. After its allotment, he raised construction of a single storeyed house thereon. The petitioners (accused persons in the trial Court) fenced the said land with barbed wire in a manner obstructing thereby the path being used by them to have access to their house, in the absence of her husband, who is a driver by profession. On 31.1.2000, when she objected to such fencing of land by the accused-petitioners, she along with her children as well as father-in-law and mother-in-law, was beaten up mercilessly. Matter was reported to the police of Police Post, Narkanda on 2.2.2000, after her husband returned to house and Rapat No. 8 to this effect was entered in the Rojnamcha. The police allegedly neither registered the case against the accused-petitioners nor took any action against them. It has led in making a complaint dated Nil through Shri B.N. Mehta, Advocate, to His Excellency the Governor of Himachal Pradesh.

(3.) Consequent upon the direction issued to the police on the aforesaid complaint, FIR No. 10/06 was registered under Sections 447, 427, 506, 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 3(1) (v)(vi) and (xv) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Police filed cancellation report. The same, however, was not accepted by the Court below and the matter rather was sent back to SDPO, Rampur for conducting re-investigation vide order dated 15.6.2007. In the meanwhile, a complaint also came to be instituted by the complainant under Sec. 200 Cr. P.C. before learned judicial Magistrate below on 22.12.2007. Pending submission of the report by the police, learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Sections 447, 427, 506, 379, 323 Penal Code and Sec. 3(1)(v)(vi) (xv) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the accused persons vide order dated 1.7.2008. Against the said order, the accused-petitioners preferred Cr. MMO No. 155/2009 before this Court, which was disposed of with the following directions: