THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. SUBHASH DEO DANGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan with the leave of this Court against the judgment of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chittorgarh, dated Dec. 16, 1978, by which he acquitted Subhash Deo Dangi respondent of the offences punishable under sections 448 and 332, IPC.

(2.) The prosecution case against Subhash Deo Dangi, respondent, may be briefly stated as tollows: Some dues of the Mining Department were outstanding against Abhey Singh, one of the co-accused, who has been discharged by the trial court. On March 17, 1964, Shri Mohan Lal Najib Tehsildar and Shri Karan Singh Foreman of the Mining Department went to the factory of Shri Abhey Singh for recovery of dues and for attachment of the properties if Abhey Sihgh failed to pay of the amount due from him. Abhey Singh's son Prakram Singh Dangi caused obstruction in the process of attachment and picked up a quarrel. Mohan Lal one of the employees of the Mining Department. rushed to the police station, Rhilwara, for lodging a first information report against Prakaram Singh. After a short while Prakram Singh and his companions also reached the police station for making a first information report against the Niab Telisildar Shri Mohan Lal and his companions with the allegation that those people had beaten Prakaram Singh and caused injuries to his person. The Station House Officer Avtar Singh heard about incident from Prakram Singh and directed Nand Kishore, Head Constable, to record a first information report regarding non-cognizable offence. After a short while Subhash Deo Dangi and his companions came inside the police station asked Avtar Singh, Station House Officer, about the recording of the first information report. The Station House Officer replied that the incident disclosed an offence under section 323, I.P.C. only and so he had directed Nand Kishore, Head Constable to record the first information report relating to a on-cognizable offence. Subhash Deo Dangi resented the reply given by the Station House Officer and became enraged He threatened Avtar Singh, Station House Officer, with dire conquences and misbehaved with him Thereupon. Avtar. Singh, Station House Officer, asked Subhash Deo Dangi to go out of the office and to control his tongue but the latter, all of a sudden, slapped Avtar Singh on his face. Thereafter, the companions of Sabash Deo Dangi made an attack on the Station House Officer. The police force stationed at the police station, and the Additional Superintendent of Police Shri Balwant Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police Shri Nathi Lal, Naib-Tehsildar of the Mining Department and others, who were present inside the police station came to the rescue of the Station House Officer from being further beaten with shoes, kicks and fists. As a result of the beating, Constables Raju Singh, Modu and Head Constable Madan Singh also received injuries on their persons. After great difficulty, the situation was brought under control by the police and Subhash Deo Dangi and his companions were arrested and detained in police lock-up. A criminal case under sections 332, 147 and 452, Penal Code was registered against Subhash Deo Dangi and his seven companions on the basi of the first information report made on March 17, 1964. After necessary investigation by the police a challan was filed in the court of the District Magistrate, Bhilwara, against the respondent and his associates to April 22, 1964. As the cross-case filed by Subhash Deo Dangi was pending in the court of the Civil Judge-cum-Magistrate First Class, Bhilwara, the District Magistrate transferred this case also to the said court. The learned Magistrate upon conducting an inquiry before the charge, came to a conclnsion that no offence was made out against Subhash Deo Dangi and the co-accused. Consequently, he discharged all the accused persons of all the offence alleged to have been committed by them.

(3.) Aggrieved by the order of discharge, the State Government filed a revision petition in the court of the Sessions Judge, Bhilwara, who, on Feb. 22, 1966 partially accepted revision-petition and while confirming the order of discharge of the other co-accused, directed he learned Magistrate to make a further inquiry against Subhash Deo Dangi, respondent, under sections 448 and 332, I.P.C. Suhash Deo Dangi filed a revision petition in the High Court against the order of the Sessions Judge, Bhilwara, but his revision petition was dismissed on Aug. 3, 1966. Thereafter, the Civil Judge and the Magistrate First Class Bhilwara, charge-sheeted Subhash Deo Dangi under sections 448 and 332, I.P.C. and tried him for these offences. The prosecution examined 17 witnesses and exhibited 16 documents and thereafter the statement of Subhash Deo Dangi was recorded under sections 342, old Cr. P.C., and the evidence of the witnesses produced by him in his defence was also recorded. The respondent exhibited 15 documents also and pleaded in his defence that he went to the police station at the instance of Sohan Lal, driver, who disclosed to him that police was not recording the first information report of Prakram Singh relating to cognizable offence punishable under section 147, I.P.C. Upon reaching the police station he asked the Station House Officer to register a case of rioting as the number of accused who induldged in beating Prakram Singh and his companions was more than 5. The Station House Officer, thereupon, became angry and administered a beating to him and his companions and detained him and his associates in the police lock-up where from they were released at the instance of the City Magistrate and other officers and were medically examined in compliance with the order of the District Magistrate. Subhash Deo Dangi further alleged in his statement that a first information report about this incident was got written by him then and there by Yashwant Singh Nahar and produced before the City Magistrate. According to his plea, the police implicated him in a false case to save their skin. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, to whom this case was transferred upon coming into force of the new Code of Criminal Procedure, concluded the trial and acquitted the respondent of the charges framed against him under sections 448 and 332, I.P.C. Hence, this appeal by the State.