SHIVLAL JOSHI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are ten Miscellaneous Petitions filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in short "the Code", whereby the petitioner, who at the relevant time, was posted as Addl. Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara, has prayed for quashing of F.I.Rs. No. 120 to 126, 128, 129 and 130 of 2005,, which were registered at the Police Station, Mandal on the basis of the complaints filed by the private respondents before the learned Judl. Magistrate, Mandal, Distt. Bhilwara under Section 147, 148, 149, 458, 323, 295, 392, 384, 330, 500 & 504 IPC and were forwarded under Section 156(3) of the Code for investigation by the police. Since in all these complaints, the offences as per the allegations and the accused are similar including the present petitioner and also the date of incident with a little variance of time i.e. between 9 PM to 12.15 AM of the intervening night of 08.04.2005 and 09.04.2005, they are being disposed -of by this common order.

(2.) IT has been pleaded in all these Misc. Petitions that on 08.04.2005 at about 6.30 PM, yearly procession of "Phooldol" was being undertaken by members of Hindu community of village Mandal as per their ancient tradition. The procession started from Bada Mandir, Charbhuja at around 5.30 PM with 200 to 250 Hindus, who were playing with ' Gulal' and singing ' Bhajans'. The procession reached at 'Lakharon Ka Chowk' at 6 PM. At that point of time, 150 to 200 persons of Muslim community came from Ansari Mohalla, who were armed with deadly weapons and Shouted & agitated on account of throwing 'Gulal' on them. They also attacked the procession carried out by the Hindus. The SHO, PS, Mandal and his team tried to control the situation alongwith Sh. Pradeep Mohan Sharma, Circle Officer, Bhilwara but the agitated members of the Muslim community pelted stones and attacked the police party, whereby the Circle Officer Sh. Pradeep Mohan Sharma, Constables Kanvari Lal and Ladulal received injuries and so also the members of the Hindu community. The report of the incident was lodged by Bhaju Ram, SHO, PS, Mandal on 08.04.2005 itself at 6.30 PM against Jamil Mohd. and 27 other persons vide FIR No. 86/05 for the offences under Section 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 353, 332 and 153A IPC, Annex. 1. The second FIR being No. 87/05 was also lodged against 9 persons of the Hindu community that after "Phooldol" procession disbursed, they hatched a criminal conspiracy and looted the shops and dwellings of Muslim community situated in various Colonies. On the situation becoming volatile, the District Magistrate ordered use of force against both the communities and when the situation became tensed, the firing was ordered on seeing the damage to the life and property. The police party also received injuries. The private respondents named in the FIRs were arrested in connection with the FIR No. 86/05 on 09.04.2005 and their injuries were mentioned in their arrest memos and were medically examined. Their police custody remand was sought on 10.04.2005 (Annex. 2) and they were sent to judicial custody on 12.04.2005. They also filed the bail application, which was rejected on 13.04.2005 vide Annex -4. They again moved the bail application under Section 439 CrPC before the learned Sessions Judge, Bhilwara, who allowed their bail application on 16.04.2005 vide Annex. 5.

(3.) IT is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that these FIRs are nothing but an abuse of the process of law and is a counter blast to the FIR originally lodged by the police against the members of the Muslim community being No. 86/05. The accused respondents never raised objection with regard to entering of the police personnels into their houses in the intervening night of 08.04.2005 and 01.04.2005 before the learned Magistrate, when they were produced for the police custody remand on 10.04.2005 and in their bail applications (Annexs. 4 and 5) and also immediately after release on 16.04.2005. Some of the FIR lodgers obtained medical certificate but these complaints against the petitioner and other police personnels were filed between the period from 27.04.2005 to 10.05.2005 i.e. the dates ranging from 12 to 24 days from the date of their release and 20 to 32 days after the date of incident. According to the learned Counsel, filing of a complaint in the Court of learned Magistrate after such a long interval of the incident, is nothing but whole action is taken malafide in a unified fashion to humiliate and harass the petitioner, who were acting in discharge of their duties on the date of incident i.e. 08.04.2005. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance on certain authorities, which will be referred at the appropriate stage.