Oshin Sarkar vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Pankaj Purohit, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By means of this C528 application, applicant has put to challenge the FIR No.73 of 2018, dated 03.05.2018, registered with P.S. Basant Vihar,

District Dehradun, Under Section 394 IPC as well as the supplementary charge-sheet submitted by the investigating officer under Section 173 Cr.P.C.

dated 02.10.2018 against the applicant under Sections 147, 341, 323, 504 & 506 IPC as well as the entire proceedings of the Criminal Case No.5423

of 2018, State vs. Rishipal @ Ritu, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st, Dehradun, District Dehradun.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant was summoned by learned trial court on 24.10.2018 after taking cognizance

against him along with other co-accused persons. He further contends that since the applicant is not named in the FIR, therefore, the charge-sheet

was submitted after investigation only against Rishipal @ Rohit, Nisha @ Sachin & Ruby, but subsequently, the supplementary charge-sheet was filed

against the applicant-Oshin Sarkar along with three other co-accused, namely, Bunny, Karishma and one juvenile-Himanshu Chettri. He also contends

that the applicant was implicated only to hamper his progress in his life.

I have gone through the FIR as well as the supplementary charge-sheet submitted by the police. Though, it is true that the applicant was not named

in the first information report, but after the investigation, the supplementary charge-sheet was filed under Sections 147, 341, 323, 504 & 506 IPC and

the cognizance was taken upon that in the year 2018 and the accused was summoned and he participated in the proceedings. Whether the applicant

has committed the alleged crime is matter of evidence before the trial court.

The argument which has been advanced by learned counsel for the applicant does not find favour to this Court as there is nothing to bring the case

within the ambit of rarest of rare case. Since prima facie a case is made out against the applicant, therefore, no interference is required. Accordingly,

the C528 application is dismissed at limine.

Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.