Kamal and Others vs Rajpal

K.C. Puri, J.—Kamal and others have filed this petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short - the Cr.P.C.) for quashing the criminal complaint No. 531 dated 6.12.2005 titled as Rajpal vs. Nathi & others (Annexure P-1), order of framing the charge dated 8.11.2011 (Annexure P-2), charge-sheet dated 8.11.2011 (Annexure P-3) and order dated 2.11.2012 (Annexure P-5) along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. In nutshell the case of the complainant is that on 15.3.2005 a quarrel had taken place between the complainant and Udaibir and Udai Ram over the sowing of wheat crop in the field at night time but the matter was reconciled. Udaibir came to the house of the complainant and told that Vinod had falsely named Udaibir regarding taking money and started abusing him. The complainant tried to convince Udaibir as to why he is taking quarrel on trivial matters. In the meanwhile, Nathi also came there and started abusing the complainant and he told that whatever is being happened, it has so happened because of his fault. Accused Kamal armed with ballam and accused Nathi armed with lathi came there and attacked him which hit below his right eye and then he hit on his head. Nathi also gave lathi blow on his head. His son Vinod and his wife Dropti and Umesh wife of his son came there from inside the house to rescue the complainant. Then Badley inflicted a lathi blow on his waist. At the same time, Virender, Naresh, Suresh, Udaibir and Bhikhari also came there armed with lathis and started beating them. Accused Kamal gave a ballam blow to Umesh as a result of which his one tooth had broken and he also received many injuries. Accused Suresh and Udaibir also caused one lathi blow to Umesh wife of his son and caused injuries on her thighs and shoulders. Nathi, Virender and Suresh also gave lathi blows to Vinod and mother of Vinod, Dropti. Udaibir and Suresh also gave a lathi blow on the chest and gave lathi blow on the head. The complainant, wife of his son and his wife raised alarm Mardia-Mardia when Kumar son of Soni, Manohar, Raju came there and witnessed the occurrence and rescued the complainant. Accused Badley also told that let them leave today as and when they find opportunity, they would kill Raj Pal. On that day many persons gathered there because of which they were saved. The complainant approached the police but of no use as only proceedings u/s 107/151 of the Cr.P.C., were initiated. The complainant, therefore, filed the complaint against the accused persons.

After recording preliminary evidence, the accused were summoned to stand their trial under Sections 148, 323, 325 and 506 of the IPC vide order dated 8.11.2011.

In pursuance to the aforesaid order dated 8.11.2011, the accused appeared and filed revision against the order dated 8.11.2011 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hathin.

The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal vide order dated 2.11.2012 dismissed the revision petition.

Feeling dissatisfied with the aforesaid orders passed by the Courts below, the accused/petitioners have directed the present petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the records of the case with his able assistance.

There is concurrent finding of fact recorded by both the Courts below that accusation against the petitioners is made out for which they have been charged. The charge can be framed on the basis of suspicious alone. There is evidence of injured eye witnesses including the medical evidence.

So, in these circumstances, no ground for interference u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing the charge is made out.

Consequently, the present petition stands dismissed. A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for strict compliance.