Ram Rattan vs State of Haryana and ors.

B.S. Yadav, J.

This is a petition filed by Ram Rattan under section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, the Code) for quashing the proceedings instituted against him in the Court of the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate Karnal and for quashing the order dated 5th March, 1984, by which he asked the petitioner to furnish a surety bond under section 116(3) of the Code in the sum of Rs. 5,000/ for keeping peace.

The police of Police Station City, Karnal presented a calendar against the petitioner and others. According to the allegations contained in the calendar, one Hira Lal had filed an application alleging therein that he along with two other labourers was working in the godown of the Food Corporation of India (for short, the F. C.I.) situate at Kacchwa Road and at other places. Ram Rattan petitioner and others forbade him from working there. Two days before the filing of the application, when he was returning from his work, the petitioner and his associates gave him a beating. He apprehended danger to his life. The said application of Hira Lal was investigated by S. I. Ram Kishan. He went to the spot of occurrence and summoned both the parties. During investigation he found that the labourers working at the F. C. I. godown had formed themselves into two groups. one being headed by Ram Rattan petitioner and the other by the complainant. Both the groups had controversy over the loading and unloading of goods of the F.C.I. Ram Rattan and his partymen were saying that in the F. C. I. labour, only he and his party would work and none else would be allowed to do the work. That party also became furious and pounced upon Hira Lal and his associates. The police controlled Ram Rattan and his associates otherwise. some serious crime would have been committed by them. Ram Rattan and his associates were arrested under section 107 read with section 151 of the code.

It appears that on 3rd March. 1984, Ram Rattan petitioner and two others filed an application for bail in the Court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Karnal who sent it to the police Station, City Karnal for report. S. I. Ram Kishan reported on that application on the same day that those persons had been arrested in a case under section 107/151 of the Code. On 4th March, 1984, the SubDivisional Magistrate ordered the petitioner and his associates to be released on each furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,0OO/ for appearance on 5th March, 1984. The police was also asked to present the calendar. On 5th March, 1984, the SubDivisional. Magistrate recorded the statement of S. I. Ram Kishan and drew up the preliminary order under section 111 of the Code upon the petitioner and served it upon the petitioner and his associates who had been arrested. As they refused to execute the bond to keep peace, vide impugned order they were asked to furnish surety under section 116 (3) of the Code.

It is not necessary to consider all the other arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner because this petition is liable to be accepted on the short ground that according to the police report, the petitioner committed the offence of criminal intimidation in the presence of the investigating Officer. Counsel argued that when a substantive offence had been committed in the presence of the investigating Officer for which he arrested the petitioner, the proceedings under section 107 of the Code are misconceived In support of this contention he has cited Ravinder Singh & others v. State of Punjab and another 1984 (1) C.L.R. 652 wherein it was remarked.

"The short ground taken by Mr. M. S. Kang learned counsel for the petitioners is that a bare reading of the report sent by the police to the Magistrate for proceeding against the petitioners under section 107/151 Criminal Procedure Code discloses that a substantive offence was committed in his presence for which he arrested the petitioners. The facts as stated in the report show that the offence of Criminal intimidation has been committed by the petitioners. So, I do not think, in view of the facts stated above, any case for proceeding under section 107/151 Criminal Procedure Code is made out against the petitioners."

Following the above observations, the present petition is allowed and the calendar and the proceedings taken against the petitioner pursuant thereto are quashed.