RAMESH SETHIA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 16.1.1993 whereby the learned Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate No. 12, Jaipur City, Jaipur took cognizance of the offences under Section 147, 323 and 451 IPC against the petitioner on the complaint filed by the non - petitioner No. 2, Raman Sachdev.

(2.) THE relevant facts of the case are these - -The petitioner is a Doctor by profession and is a tenant in the Eastern side of Plot No. 40, Hospital Road, C -Scheme, Jaipur which belongs to non -petitioner No. 2, Raman Sachdev. The case of the petitioner is that the non -petitioner was bent upon in getting the premises vacated from the petitioner by hook or crook, therefore, during the mind -night of December 29 and 30, 1992 at about 12.30 A.M., when the petitioner was sleeping in his house, the non -petitioner Sach Dev along with his two friends rang the door bell of the portion of the house wherein the petitioner was residing. The petitioner woke up, but on seeing the non -petitioners and his friends standing outside of the door, he refused to open the door as they were drunk. It is alleged that the non -petitioner and his friends broke open the door and entered into the house of the petitioner and started manhandling him. On the alarm raised by the petitioner, his brother came to his rescue, but the non -petitioner and his friends became violent, whereupon the petitioner had to run towards hospital and he lodged a FIR at Police Station Ashok Nagar, Jaipur at 1.30 A.M. on 30.12.1992 vide (Annexure -1) of the present petition. It is stated that the police authorities immediately took action and apprehended the non -petitioner No. 2, Ram Sachdev and his friend Surendra Singh during the very night and got them examined at the S.M.S. Hospital for proof of consumption of Alchahal. The test of the non -petitioner No. 2 and his friend Surendra Singh gave positive result regarding intoxication vide Annexure -3. Since the police had already registered a case against the non -petitioner for offences under Sections 323 and 457 read with Section 34 of IPC, the non -petitioner No. 2 and his friend Surendra Singh were charge -sheeted in the Court.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner has vehmently urged that the averments made in the complaint filed by the petitioner and the statement recorded under Section 200/202 Cr.P.C. are required to be read in the context of the facts and circumstances attending on the commission of the alleged offences. It was submitted that a bare glance at the averments made in the complaint and the statements recorded under Section 200/202 Cr.PC. would amply show that the occurance had taken place during the hours of the night and the petitioner had lodged the FIR with the police station concerned, within a minutes after taking place of the occurrence whereupon the police had apprehended non - petitioner No. 2. It was also pointed out that on examination of non -petitioner No. 2 Ram Sachdev and his friend Surendra Singh, they were found intoxicated. It was submitted that the complaint by the non -petitioner was filed as late as after 5 days of the occurrence and false version therein was given to the effect that out of fear non -petitioner No. 2 could not file the complaint earlier. It was thus, submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, there should have no difficulty in arriving at the conclusion that the complaint filed by non - petitioner No. 2 against the petitioner was not only false and vaxatious but also malicious was filed as a counter blast to the step taken by the petitioner against the non -petitioner only to harass and humuliate him.