RAM LUBHAYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. the four accused-petitioners Ram Lubhaya, Balveer singh. Surjeet singh and Nandlal have invoked the inherent powers of this Court for quashing an order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Sri Karanpur dated 23-1-X978 by which, cognizance of offences under Sections 392, 365 and 342, I. P. C. was taken against them on the negative final report submitted by the police.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the relevant facts giving rise to this proceeding are that Bhajansingh addressed a written report to the Superintendent of Police, Sri Ganganagar, somewhere in October 1977. It was mentioned therein that nearly two months ago, he went to purchase Sugar to a Ration Shop situate in Chok 61-F. While he was returning, the four accused persons and one Har Bhajan singh challenged him. They started beating him. He had Rs. 100/- and a wrist watch. The miscreants forcibly relieved him of the wrist watch and Rs. 100/ -. Thereafter, they put him in a jeep and took him to Karanpur. There he was detained by the miscreants, They foisted a false case of illicit liquor on him and took him to the Excise Officer, The Excise Officer took him to police station. It was alleged by Bhajansingh that he was thus abducted and confined. The said report was received by the Station House Officer Karanpur on 27-10-1977. The police registered a case under Sections 365, 342 and 382, I. P. C. and took up investigation. Some persons were examined during investigation. The investigation revealed that the report submitted by Bhajansingh was entirely false and baseless. He had filed the report with ulterior motive to save himself in the Excise case of illicit liquor under Section 54, Rajasthan Excise Act, In the result, the Police submitted a negative final report in case, before the Judicial Magistrate, Karanpur. The learned Magistrate, however, disagreed with the police and took cognizance of offences under Section 342, 365 and 392, I. P. C. against the petitioners. He issued arrest warrants against them to secure their attendance.

(3.) AGGRIEVED against the said order of taking cognizance, the four accused persons have filed this application.