JAGDISH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a miscellaneous petition by which, the order of the Additional Sessions Judge No. I Bharatpur, dated 19th Septemher, 87 has been challenged.

(2.) The police submitted a challan u/s. 406, IPC against one Jagdish; and the learned Magistrate on 19th Feb., 1986 framed charge against him u/s. 406, IPC. Then, a revision was preferred; and the learned AddI. Sessions Judge dismissed the said revision on 19th Sept., 1987 and confirmed the order of the learned Magistrate framing charge u/s. 406, IPC. This has been challenged in, this Court on the ground that absolutely, there is no case made out from the record of the case against the petitioner and that both the Court below have misused the process of Court.

(3.) After perusing the record, I am of the opinion that the entire case has been concocted and made out by the police. Amarnath who was Asst. Sub-Inspector of Police posted at Police Outpost, Kumar is the author of all this manipulation. The entire case against Jagdish has been later on fabricated. On 6th July, 1979 Mst. Purago submitted a written report to SHO-PS- Kotwali, Bharatpur alleging that she had pledged one gold-Kondnl with Krishna Kumar for Rs. 5,000/- though Jagdish Prasad. When she asked to release the said ornament from the pledge on 6th July, 1979, Krishna Kumar refused to return the same. So she submitted the report, on 6th July, 1979. Then, Amarnath on 8th July, 1979, submitted a written-report to SHO-Kotwali, Bharatpur, to the effect that on 6th July, 1979, Mst. Purago was interrogated, and she had stated that one Kondni was pledged with Jagdish Prasad for Rs. 5,000/- by her, about two sears before, and further that when she went to Jagdish Prasad to get the ornament released from pledge, the latter avoided to return the said ornament, and the report dated 6th July, 1979, was dictated as directed by Jagdish Prasad. So, it gives inference that Mst. Purago had pledged the ornament actually with Jagdish Prasad, and later on, she reported at the instance of Jagdish Prasad, and she submitted the report on 6th July, 1979 that the ornament was pledged with Krishnakumar. Another important aspect is that during her interrogation on 8th July, 1979, Mst. Pur ago did not state that apart from the Kondni she had also kept one Hash and one gold-chain with Jagdish Prasad petitioner after taking Rs. 1,500/-. The case was latter on, developed in statement u/s, 161, Cr. P.C. She was examined twice u/s. 161, Cr. P.C. On 8th July, 1978, one statement was recorded, and the second was recorded on 13th July, 1979. In both these statements this fact was written that she had pledged one Hash and one gold-chain also, with Jagdish Prasad, after taking Rs. 1500/- When her statement was recorded on 8th July, 1979, why this fact was not mentioned by Amarnath in the report of 8th July, 1979 which was submitted to SHO-PS-Kotwali, Bharatpur. When this report was submitted by him, this fact was not known that along with Kondnl, Mst. Purago had also kept one Hash and one chain also. This shows that the statements u/s. 161, Cr. P.C. dated 8th July and 13th July, 1979, are false ones.