Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Dr. Deepak Tiwari S/O Shri Krishna Kant ... vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 12 December, 2018
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7351/2018
Dr. Deepak Tiwari S/o Shri Krishna Kant Tiwari, R/o 4/38,
Malviya Nagar, Jaipur, Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp, Rajasthan.
2. Dr. Mukta D/o Shri Vishwa Kumar Puri, R/o J-601, Unique
Tower, Near Nri Circle, Sector 26, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer,
Jaipur, Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Yadav
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Meenakshi Pareek PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
-/Order/-
12/12/2018
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
seeking quashing of FIR No.925/2018 registered at Police Station Pratap
Nagar, Jaipur City (East) for the offences under Sections 323 and 341
IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the
present case the occurrence had taken place on 29.12.2017 and
respondent no.2 - the wife of the petitioner filed the complaint before
the Police on 31.12.2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
contended that on the said application, police initiated action under
Sections 107/116 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further
contended that the respondent no.2 filed a complaint in the court of
competent jurisdiction and upon orders passed under Section 156(3)
Cr.P.C., the present impugned FIR was registered on 8.10.2018.
(2 of 2) [CRLMP-7351/2018]
Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that
exaggerated version has been given by distorting marital discord and
petulance between husband and wife. Learned counsel for the petitioner
had contended that no incident had taken place and there is no medical evidence to corroborate version of the complainant that the petitioner gave beating to his wife.
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, considering the nature of allegations, this Court is of the view that truth and veracity thereof shall be adjudicated by the trial court when the parties lead evidence. Merely because police had initiated proceedings under Section 107/116 Cr.P.C., it cannot be said that the complainant has no right to pursue her remedy to prosecute the petitioner for offences alleged. It may be noted that the proceedings under Sections 107/116 Cr.P.C. are preventive in nature and not penal in nature.
However, considering the nature of allegations and the fact that both petitioner and the respondent no.2 are doctors, personal appearance of the petitioner before the trial court is exempted subject to following conditions:-
a) That the petitioner shall file an undertaking before the trial court that he shall appear before the trial court at the time of framing of charges, recording of statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and at the time of delivery of the judgment.
b) That in the undertaking filed the petitioner shall specifically state that any evidence recorded in his absence, but in presence of his counsel, shall be binding upon him.
c) That the accused petitioner shall also undertake to appear before the trial court as and when called by the trial Judge.
In view of above, the present petition is disposed of.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J Mak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)