Ajay Lal vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Ravindra Maithani, J

This petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.398 of 2019, State vs. Jayendra Singh Rawat and others pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Tehri Garhwal relating to the offences punishable under Sections 354, 323, 504 & 506 read with Section 34 IPC, P.S. New Tehri, District Tehri Garhwal as well as charge sheet dated 05.03.2019 alongwith the impugned summoning order dated 02.04.2019 so far it relates to the applicants.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

In the instant case FIR was lodged on 25.01.2019 at 06:30 p.m. under Sections 354, 323, 504 and 506 IPC. According to the FIR on 23.01.2019 at 05:00 p.m. while the first informant was working in her field a Jayendra Singh abused and assaulted her. Soon after, the petitioners also joined him and abused and threatened the first informant to life.

After investigation charge sheet has been submitted in the matter against the petitioners under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC and accordingly cognizance has been taken by the court. This order is passed on charge sheet itself. Although, it is indicated that in the summoning order dated 02.04.2019, Section 354 has been wrongly mentioned while summoning the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would argue that with regard to the incident of 23.01.2019 a report was given on the same day by the wife of the younger brother of the petitioner no.1 on which police had directed for inquiry. Subsequently FIR was lodged on 25.01.2019. It is urged that in the instant matter FIR was lodged as a counter blast to the FIR which was earlier lodged by the wife of the younger brother of the petitioner no.1. Therefore, it is argued that prima-facie the case is false and interference can be made under Section 482 of the Code. In support of his contention learned counsel for applicant placed reliance on the case law laid down in the case of Ashok Kumar Gupta vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another (2017) 11 Supreme Court Cases 239. In the case of Ashok Kumar Gupta the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the facts and circumstances of the case held that the proceedings were clear abuse of process law. In that case learned State Counsel fairly stated that the complaint appeared to be absurd.

Here is the case, where with regard to the incident, which occurred on 23.01.2019 at 05:00 p.m., FIR has been lodged by the wife of the younger brother of the petitioner no.1 on the one hand and another FIR was filed by respondent no.2. It is FIR versus FIR with regard to one and the same incident, which occurred at the same time. Impliedly it is admitted by both the parties that on 23.01.2019 an incident had occurred. The question would be as to who was the aggressor? Was it a free fight or related issue?

Be that as it may, the fact remains that the FIR in the instant case reveals commission of cognizable offence and after investigation charge sheet has already been submitted. It is not a case where it can be said that no case is made out and the FIR is absurd. Instead, it is a case where there is version and cross version of an incident. The factual aspects definitely cannot be looked into in these proceedings under Section 482 of the Code. It has to be tested at the trial. Therefore, the Court is of the view that there are no reasons to interfere in the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code. Hence, the instant petition deserves dismissal.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would argue that petitioners would appear before the court below, therefore, direction may be issued that their bail application may be considered on the same day.

The petition under Section 482 of the Code is dismissed. However, if the petitioners appear before the Court below, their bail application may be disposed of as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.