Vinod Kumar Sharma vs State of Punjab and others

Jai Singh Sekhon, J.

Through this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Vinod Kumar Sharma petitioner seeks quashment of the complaint for offences under Sections 232/506/504 IPC as well as order dated 9.11.1991 of the trial Court summoning the petitioner to face trial for the abovereferred offences interalia on the ground that the allegations are vague and that this complaint has been filed against him at the instigation of Pritam Singh ExSarpanch of his village Jandu Singh. It is also mentioned that the petitioner has no business to rent a house at Malerkotal especially when his village falls in District Jalandhar. He has also contended that the petitioner is Manager of Janta High School, Jandu Singha and that he was present in connection with rural supports being held on the premises of that School from 14th to 16th November, 1991.

On notice, learned counsel for the complainant has not filed the return but simply maintained that no case for interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is made out as the trial Court has taken cognizance of the matter and summoned the accused after recording preliminary evidence. He also maintained that the accused had yet to establish his innocence before the trial Court. He has placed reliance on the observations of the Apex Court in Mohinder Singh v. Gulwant Singh and others, 1992 Volume (2) Supreme Court Cases 213.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties besides perusing the record.

The Apex Court in Mohinder Singh''s case (supra) has dealt with the scope of enquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by holding that it is extremely restricted only to finding out the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint in order to determine whether process should issue or not. It was further remarked that the enquiry at that stage does not partake the character of a full dress trial which can only take place after issuing of process under Section 204 of the Code and appearance of the accused. In Mohinder Singh''s case, this Court had quashed the criminal complaint as well as the summoning order under Section 204 of the Code for offence under Section 493 IPC etc by holding that the essential rites for solemnizing the first marriage were not proved. The Apx Court reversed that with the aforesaid observations. In the case in hand the allegations of the complainant are specific as he has given time of occurrence at 8 PM on 5th November, 1991. The accusedpetitioner had yet to establish his innocence by crossexamining the complainant witnesses.

Under these circumstances, no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order of the trial Court at this stage especially when the trial Court is bound to go into the version of the petitioner at the time of framing the charge.