AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The applicant-original accused has filed this application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, with the following prayer:
"7 (b) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside the F.I.R C.R.No. II- 165/2009 registered on 1.9.2009, at Botad Police Station, District Bhavnagar, against the petitioner for the offence U/Ss. 507 & 114 of Indian Penal Code".
Complaint being FIR C.R.II-165 of 2009 was registered on 01.09.2009, with the Botad Police Station.
Perusal of the complaint shows that the complainant has invoked the provisions of Section 507 of the Indian Penal Code. It is the case of the complainant that one Mr. Narendrasinh Mangalsinh Jadeja, a Contractor at Bhavnagar had threatened him of dire consequences. The reading of the complaint, further, shows that the only averment made in the complaint is that the said contractor had connections with the accused-applicant herein and through the Offices of the complainant and the accused, the contractor indulged in malpractices. The other
averment made in the complaint is that the accused had called him in his chamber and had threatened him of dire consequences.
The applicant before this Court had raised the contention that the complaint does not satisfy the ingredients of Section 507 of the Indian Penal Code, inasmuch as there was no anonymous communication, by which the complainant was intimidated or that there was no concealment of the name of a person, who had threatened the complainant. Moreover, it is the case of the applicant that the ingredients of Section 506 are not attracted.
From the memo of the application, it has been pointed out that the complaint has been lodged at the hands of the complainant, in view of the fact that several show-cause-notices have been issued to the respondent-original complainant with regard to discharge of his duties. Such show-cause notices have been annexed with the application. The grievance apparently is that the complaint is lodged only with a view to intimidate the applicant, and therefore, this case squarely falls in a category of case, where the
complaint has been lodged only to abuse the process of law.
Having heard learned advocate Ms. Kruti Shah for the applicant and Mr. Yusufkhan Pathan, learned advocate for respondent No.2 and learned APP Mr. Himanshu Patel, for respondent No.1., I am of the opinion that it is apparent that the complaint is nothing but an abuse of process of law. Moreover, reading the complaint, it is no case of the complainant that there was criminal intimidation by an anonymous caller nor that the person who had threatened the complainant was concealing his identity.
Learned APP Mr. Himanshu Paten, contends that the ingredients of Section 507 have been made out.
According to him, even otherwise though the FIR is lodged invoking Section 507 of IPC, ultimately, while the investigation progresses, it could be altered to one under Section 506(2) of IPC and therefore this Court should not in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction quash the complaint.
Apparently on reading the complaint, the ingredients of Section 507 as well Section 506(2) do not appear to have been satisfied. On reading the complaint, it is apparent that the complainant has named one Contractor Narendrasinh Mangalsinh Jadeja.
Therefore, in my opinion, the complaint does not satisfy the ingredients of the sections invoked. Even otherwise, looking to the fact that the respondent-complainant was a recipient of Show-cause-notices at the hands of the applicant, have a reason to believe that the complaint was lodged only with a view to intimidate the applicant. The application is, therefore, allowed. Hence, the FIR being C.R.II-165 of 2009 registered on 01.09.2009, with the Botad Police Station, is hereby quashed and set aside. Rule made absolute.