Bhanu vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Pankaj Purohit, J

This C482 application is pending before this Court since the date of its filing on 18.05.2022. On several occasions, the matter was simply adjourned on the request made by learned counsel for the applicant. Finally, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.03.2023 directed the matter to be listed for its consideration on its own merits in the week commencing 27.03.2023.

Today, the learned counsel for the applicant is present through V.C. is again asking for the date in the matter.

Keeping in view the facts stated hereinabove, there is no reason to grant any adjournment in the matter. Accordingly, the C482 application is being considered on its own merits.

By means of present C482 application, applicant has put to challenge the cognizance order dated 09.07.2021 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Criminal Case No.745 of 2021, State vs. Bhanu & another, under Sections 308, 325, 323, 324, 504 IPC as well as to quash the entire aforesaid proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case.

Brief facts of the case are that respondent no.2-informant lodged an FIR stated therein that the younger brother of the informant, namely, Rohit Kumar used to go Sai Library for his studies. On 27.11.2019 at about 09:15, the present applicant along with other co-accused started abusing the brother of respondent no.2. Thereafter, present applicant and other co-accused assaulted him and the brother of informant sustained injuries on the head.

After investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted by the police against the applicant on 22.06.2020. Thereafter, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee took cognizance on charge-sheet and summoned the applicant on 09.07.2021 in Criminal Case No.745 of 2021, State vs. Bhanu & another.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has falsely been implicated in the instant case and he has no intention to commit the said offence. He also submits that as per medical report, the injuries were not dangerous to life. Furthermore, there is no independent witness to support the prosecution.

Per contra, learned State Counsel submits that the investigating officer found credible and cogent evidence against the applicant. He also submits that that the court below after appreciating the evidence available on record has rightly summoned the applicant. Furthermore, the applicant has committed a serious offence.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the entire documents available on record.

From perusal of the FIR, prima facie, the commission of cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. In this view of the matter, this Court does not want to interfere in the matter as the law is very clear on the point that the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be resorted to in the rarest of the rare cases. Accordingly, the present C482 application fails and the same is dismissed.

Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.