Bhai Lal Gautam vs Puran Chand and Another

O.P. Garg, J.—This application has been filed u/s 482, Code of Criminal Procedure with the following prayers:

(i) call for the report from VI Ith A.D.J., Agra in regard to the enquiry report about corruption in the courts at Agra; and

(ii) thereafter hearing the parties, quash the proceedings in the defamation filed by the Respondent against the Petitioner vide No. 1266/91/under Section 500, I.P.C. pending in the court of Ist A.C.J.M., Agra in the interest of justice; and

(iii) pass such other further order/orders as your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case;

(iv) to stay the arrest of applicant in case No. 1266/91 u/s 500, I.P.C. pending in the court of A.C.J.M., Agra

The applicant Bhai Lal is the father-in-law of the opposite party Puran Chand. Both of them appeared before the court and made their submissions, in person.

Admittedly Smt. Sunita Bharti daughter of the applicant was married to opposite party. She died on 8.11.1986. According to the applicant, she was murdered by the opposite party as the demand for dowry could not be met. During the life time of his wife, opposite party filed petition No. 458 of 1981 for divorce. An ex parte decree was obtained in the divorce case on 16.10.1985. Steps were taken to set aside the ex parte decree. The divorce petition was dismissed by the Judge, Family Court, Agra on 12.10.1994. It is also alleged that the opposite party married another woman in March, 1984 during the subsistence of his married wife, Smt. Sunita and since he had committed an offence u/s 494, I.P.C. a criminal case was filed against the opposite party. The Crime Case No. 940/1984 u/s 494, I.P.C. ended in the acquittal of the opposite party on 1.7.1991. It is also alleged that the opposite party was convicted in Session Trial No. 366 of 1987 and was sentenced to 7 years R.I. by VI Ith Additional Sessions Judge, Agra. On appeal filed in this Court by the opposite party, he has been granted bail. The opposite party filed a Crime Case No. 1266 of 1991 u/s 500, I.P.C. against the present applicant in which, it appears, he has been summoned. The applicant moved an application before the Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra for dropping the defamation case. He also moved an application for the transfer of the case from the court of Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra to any other court. This application was dismissed. The applicant approached the District Judge/Sessions Judge, Agra but his application for transfer was dismissed. The applicant has made certain allegations about the conduct of the Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate and the District Judge, Agra. It is alleged that the applicant was wrongly confined without any justification and written orders, for about two hours for no fault of his by the I Ind Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra as well as Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra. It is also alleged that the District Judge has been very cruel to the applicant as he turned him out of the Court. According to the applicant, there is rampant corruption in the District Courts at Agra in respect of which an enquiry is being conducted by the VI Ith Additional Sessions Judge, Agra.

The opposite party refuted all the allegations/submissions made by the present applicant (his father-in-law). He maintained that he is being harassed and victimised by the applicant on various scores by involving him in a series of cases.

The record of the instant case further indicates that when the case was taken up for hearing by Hon''ble R.N. Ray, J., on 10.3.1997, the applicant shouted and did not allow the Hon''ble Judge to complete the dictation with the result the proceedings u/s 340, Code of Criminal Procedure were initiated against the applicant and a notice was issued to him to show cause as to why proceedings relating to criminal contempt be not drawn against him. This notice was, however, discharged by Hon''ble R.N. Ray, J., on 14.3.1997.

From the various allegations made in the application u/s 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, it would be apparent that the applicant has taken incoherent and incongruous stand. He has also cast aspersions on the officers of the subordinate judiciary, including the Sessions Judge, Agra. The complaint filed against the applicant by the opposite party u/s 500, I.P.C. as well as summoning order have not been brought on record. From the arguments made before this Court by the applicant as well as the opposite party, who appeared in person, it is apparent that the relations between them are not only bitter but acrimonious. Both of them have resorted to litigative zeal; nevertheless, the proceedings u/s 500, I.P.C. launched against the applicant have to be disposed of as early as possible.

In the light of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, it is not necessary to invoke inherent jurisdiction of this Court to quash the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 1266 of 1991 u/s 500, I.P.C. it would be proper and in the interests of both the parties if a direction is issued for the expeditious disposal of the case.

It is hereby directed that the learned Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra shall finally conclude and bring to a logical end the criminal proceeding in Crime Case No. 1266 of 1991 u/s 500, I.P.C. pending in his court within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him by the applicant.

With the above observation, the application is finally disposed of.