Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Raj Kumar Gupta vs State Of J&K; And Another on 1 November, 2017
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT JAMMU
Pet. u/s 561-A No. 214/2011
MP Nos. 239/2011 and 01/2016
Date of decision : 01.11.2017
Raj Kumar Gupta vs. State of J&K and another
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Janak Raj Kotwal, Judge
Appearance:
For petitioner/appellant(s) : Ms. Rani Kiyala, Advocate vice
Mr. Rahul Pant, Advocate
Mr. Sudershan Sharma, Advocate
For applicant/respondent (s) : Mr. S. S. Nanda, Sr. AAG
In this petition under section 561-A Cr.P.C, petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 103/2004 of Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu registered against him for offence under sections 353/224 RPC. The charge sheet arising therein pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1 st Class (2nd Additional Munsiff, Jammu) as also order dated 28.02.2006 passed by the learned Magistrate, whereby the learned Magistrate, while taking cognizance in the case, has proceeded in terms of section 512 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Record available on the file shows that the petitioner accompanied with four others allegedly attacked a police party headed by PW Suresh Kumar, Sub Inspector of Police Station, Bari Brahmna, immediately after he was arrested by the said police party in connection with FIR No. 44/2004 under sections 307, 341, 342, 323, 147 and 148 RPC outside 561-A No. 214/2011, MP Nos. 239/2011 & 01/2016 Page 1 of 2 his house at Gandhi Nagar, Jammu. He attacked the police party and managed to escape from their lawful custody. PW Suresh Kumar lodged the impugned FIR at Police Station, Gandhi Nagar and after investigation, impugned charge sheet was filed. The petitioner, however, absconded after the commission of offence and could not be arrested. Learned Magistrate, therefore, vide impugned order dated 28.02.2006, after taking cognizance in the matter, proceeded in terms of section 512 Cr.P.C. against him.
Quashing of the FIR, the charge sheet and the order dated 28.02.2006 is sought on the grounds that no offence is committed by the petitioner, the police party was not legally entitled to arrest him so no offence under section 224 can be said to have been committed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no prima facie case to put the petitioner to trial is made out so FIR as well as the charge sheet are liable to be quashed.
On careful consideration of the material placed by the prosecution before the learned Magistrate, copies whereof have been produced by the petitioner, I am not persuaded to take a view that a case for showing indulgence in terms of section 561-A Cr.P.C. is made out.
Viewed thus, this petition has no merit and is dismissed. Registry shall send a copy of this order to the learned trial court.
(Janak Raj Kotwal) Judge Jammu:
01.11.2017 Meenakshi 561-A No. 214/2011, MP Nos. 239/2011 & 01/2016 Page 2 of 2