AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Vivek Bharti Sharma, J
This criminal petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused for quashing the entire proceedings arising out of Complaint Case No.225 of 2021, Naveen Kumar Vs. Rajendra Mandola, under Sections 420, 406, 465 of IPC, pending in the court of A.C.J.M. Roorkee, District Haridwar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused would submit that the proceedings are misconceived, incorrect and illegal for the reason that the private respondent/complainant did not give the list of witnesses in the complaint case.
He, however, would submit that the case may be fixed before the Lok Adalat.
Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1/complainant would vehemently oppose the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused on the ground that this is the criminal case, therefore, it should not be sent to the Lok Adalat.
He would further submit that the genesis of this case is that FIR No.218 of 2016 dated 10.08.2016 was registered at P.S. Gangnahar, District Haridwar, under Sections 406 & 420 IPC in which Final Report was filed by the Police and on the protest application of the respondent No.1/complainant the case was registered as a protest petition; that, as such there was no occasion for respondent No.1/complainant to give the list of witnesses.
He would further submit that the list of witnesses was also not required as the names of the witnesses, whose statements were recorded by the Police during the investigation, were very much there in the Final Report as well as in the Case Diary.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused would further submit that the other litigation in respect of offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act is also pending between the petitioner and respondent No.1/complainant.
However, in the considered view of this Court the other litigation pending between the parties cannot be the ground for quashing of the proceedings.
It is trite that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 528 B.N.S.S. has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution and only to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice. In view of this Court, this is not the fit case where the powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised.
In view of the above, present C482 petition lacks merits and the same is hereby dismissed in limine.
The petitioner/accused is directed to appear before the Trial Court on 05.11.2024 at 10:30 AM.
Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused is requested to inform the petitioner accordingly.
No notice would be sent to the petitioner/accused by the concerned Trial Court for appearance.
Let copy of this order be sent to the Trial Court for ensuring compliance, as per law.