Om Prakash vs First Asstt. Civil Judge and Another

Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.—Both the above-said applications arise out of the same complaint and cognizance order, so are being disposed of by this common single judgment.

By way of these criminal applications, the prayer has been made to quash the order of cognizance dated 10.4.2006 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in complaint case No. 277/2006, titled as Smt. Munni Devi v. Om Prakash and Ors.. It has also been prayed to quash the entire proceedings of the said complaint case.

It is pertinent to mention here that Sri Nagesh Aggarwal, Advocate is appearing on behalf of all the applicants in both the applications while opposite party No. 2-Smt. Munni Devi, despite of being personally served, has not turned up today to oppose those applications. It is also relevant to mention here that in miscellaneous application No. 334/2006, Sri Lalit Tewari, Advocate filed the counter affidavit also on behalf of Respondent No. 2, but no such counter affidavit has been filed in the miscellaneous application No. 372/2006.

It appears that Smt. Munni Devi was a member of the committee which was organized and conducted by Sri Om Prakash. This was a committee for the purpose of collecting certain amount of money per month from each member and to give it to one of the members. This way, each member had to get cumulative money from all the members once in the entire tenure of the committee. The dispute arose due to default in payment by Smt. Munni Devi and this led to an incident of dated 26.3.2006 at about 7 PM. The quarrel took place between the two which turned into manhandling between Smt. Munni Devi and her favouring persons on the one hand while Om Prakash and his men on the other. Om Prakash got himself medically examined at about 8:50 PM and lodged an FIR/NCR at 23:30 PM at P.S. Jwalapur for the offences of Section 323, 504 and 506 IPC. A cross FIR/NCR was also lodged by Smt. Munni Devi against Om Prakash on the same day, i.e. on 26.3.2006 at 22:24 PM without any medical examination of herself. Being non-cognizable report, it appears that the police did not take any further action in the matter.

Smt. Munni Devi filed a complaint case No. 277/2006 on 1.4.2006 against Om Prakash as well as against all the applicants in miscellaneous application No. 372/2006, narrating that on 27.3.2006 at about 8 PM, all these applicants came collectively and entered in her shop and they all beat her by fists and kicks. Om Prakash tried to strangulate Smt. Munni Devi, torn her clothes and made her naked. On hearing the noise of complainant Smt. Munni Devi and her daughter Reena, the nearby neighbourers assembled to her rescue. All the accused persons caused loss to the furniture and other articles which were kept in her shop.

She examined herself u/s 200 Code of Criminal Procedure as well as her witnesses Desh Raj, Satpal and Kishan Singh were examined u/s 202 Code of Criminal Procedure The Magistrate, having considered the statements of Smt. Munni Devi as well as her witnesses, passed the impugned order of cognizance dated 10.4.2006, where-against these petitions have been filed.

It has been contended on behalf of learned Counsel of the applicants that this complaint filed by Smt. Munni Devi is the outcome of the vengeance nurtured by her due to inaction by the police on the FIR/NCR lodged by her on 26.3.2006.

The Magistrate, on the cognizance order itself, has found that Smt. Munni Devi had not supported her own version in her statement u/s 200 Code of Criminal Procedure ., as regards making her naked and tearing her clothes by the accused persons. In her statement u/s 200 Code of Criminal Procedure ., she has not specifically disclosed as to on what date and time, this second alleged incident was committed by the accused persons. He has only narrated the version of 26.3.2006 categorically wherefore she had already lodged an FIR/NCR without her medical examination. Her two witnesses Desh Raj and Satpal also in their statements u/s 202 Code of Criminal Procedure have not whispered a single word regarding the alleged incident of 27.3.2006, much less the incident of 26.3.2006.

Third witness Kishan Singh, who was examined u/s 202 Code of Criminal Procedure is the fellow accused in the NCR lodged by Om Prakash against Smt. Munni Devi. So his statement, in this way, is not trustworthy.

It has also been contended on behalf of the learned Counsel of the applicants that the reality is otherwise which can be infiltrated from the medical report of Om Prakash dated 26.3.2006. This medical report entails a number of injuries found on the vital part of Om Prakash, which is sufficient to show that in the incident of scuffling dated 26.3.2006, he suffered the injuries at the hands of Smt. Munni Devi and her men, while Smt. Munni Devi did not suffer any injury. It further shows that Smt. Munni Devi and her men Dr. Sudhir, Kishan and Phool Kumar were the aggressors and Om Prakash barely defended himself.

In such view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the complaint filed by Smt. Munni Devi was on the fabricated grounds and cannot be allowed to sustain.

For the reasons as aforesaid, both the C482 petitions are allowed. Impugned order of cognizance dated 10.4.2006 and the proceedings of the complaint case No. 277/2006, titled above, are hereby quashed.