AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The case is called out.
Learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shyam Bahadur, Advocate and learned A.G.A. for the State are present in the Court.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed to quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 5.4.2020 and the order dated 31.7.2020 taking cognizance by learned court FTC/S.D., A.C.J.M. Raebareli, on such charge sheet and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.533 of 2020, State of U.P. Vs. Haseel @ Seebu and Anr., arising out of FIR No.0086/2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Shivratanganj, District - Amethi, which is presently pending in the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Vth, Raebareli.
On perusal of the F.I.R. made annexure no.1 to the petition, wherein allegations are made that pursuant to the altercation between the children and Prakash bursted, when the complainant of the case tried to specify them and make a complaint to the guardians of the children, he was beaten with lathi, danda, stick and fists on the date of incident 29.3.2020 at 12 O'clock. The investigating Officer then started investigation, recorded statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the injured and victim and got them examined medically, the following injuries are reported in medical certificate:-
"Injury:- 1. Complain of pain in back of neck.
Complain of pain in right lateral side of neck.
Complain of pain in upper part of chest.
Complain of pain in left buttock.
Duration:- No any duration because no visible injury seen only complain of pain.
Opinion:- Only complain of pain. Hence, patient kept under observation and consider for further any problem.
No opinion because no any visible injury is seen only complain of pain."
However, this is simple hurt alongwith threatening and intimidation, the charge sheet on the basis of the statements of witnesses and medical certificate to the injuries was submitted finding conformity with the essential ingredients of offences under Sections 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. The cognizance order of the court is annexed with challenge to the issuance of summons. Since at the time of cognizance, the court has to ascertain whether the allegations are not merely a gossip but if the allegations are taken as a whole, will prima facie amount to constitute an offence, only. The court finding it a triable case by it, has taken cognizance under Section 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and then issued summon.
In the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down norms where F.I.R., charge sheet or criminal proceeding pursuant thereto may be quashed on the complaint under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., exercising the extraordinary inherent power of the court so as to to stop the abuse of process.These are as follows:-
"(i) where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the proceedings;
(ii) where the allegations in the first information report or complaint taken at their fact value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the offence alleged.
(iii) where the allegations constitute an offence, but there is no legal evidence adduced or the evidence adduced clearly or manifestly fails to prove the charge."
In State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors. reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, Hon'ble Supreme Court has illustrated several circumstances wherein the extraordinary power under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code may be exercised for the purpose of preventing an abuse of process or to secure the ends of Justice or to enforce the order of the court. Illustrations quoted hereunder are treated as guidelines for the purpose of exercising of powers under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code:-
"102.(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused."
(2) where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code;
(3) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or 'complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused;
(4) where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code;
(5) where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused;
(6) where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party;
(7) where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
Furthermore, in the case of Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal (2007)12 SCC 1 in para 27, it is further held by Hon'ble Apex Court that extraordinary power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be exercised to stifle the genuine proceeding of the Court. For easy reference, para-27 is quoted hereunder:-
"27. The powers possessed by the High Court under section 482 of the Code are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. The court must be careful to see that its decision in exercise of this power is based on sound principles. The inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. The High Court should normally refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where all the facts are incomplete and hazy; more so, when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of such magnitude that they cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material. Of course, no hard and fast rule can be laid down in regard to cases in which the High Court will exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction of quashing the proceedings at any stage."
On the discussions made hereinabove, no merit is found in the present application, hence liable to be rejected.
Accordingly, the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is rejected.