Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Manoj S/O Shri Nemi Chand B/C Dhobi vs State Of Rajasthan on 19 July, 2018
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3966/2018
Manoj S/o Shri Nemi Chand B/c Dhobi , Aged About 26 Years,
R/o Plot No. 80, Jaitpuri Colony, Police Station Mahesh Nagar,
Jaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan , Through P.p.
2. S.h.o. Police Station Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur , Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali Khan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prakash Thakuriya PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
-/Order/-
19/07/2018
The present petition has been filed under Section 482
Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of entire criminal proceedings arising out
of Criminal Case No.9699/2017 titled State vs. Manoj, pending in
the court of Additional Civil Judge & Metropolitan Magistrate
No.30, Jaipur Metropolitan.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner on 20.9.2015 lodged the FIR No.390/2015
registered at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur for the of
offences under Sections 323, 341, 379, 504 IPC and Section 3(1)
(x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The learned counsel for
the petitioner has contended that during investigation both the
parties affected compromise and the dispute between both the
parties was amicably settled. Therefore, the petitioner submitted
an application before the investigating officer that he no longer
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-3966/2018]
intends to pursue the FIR. Resultantly, the investigating officer
submitted the Final Report (Annexure-2) in negative form.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has further
contended that after the aforesaid Final Report was submitted,
SHO, Police Station Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur submitted a complaint
under Section 211 IPC against the petitioner and the said
complaint was presented before the court of Metropolitan
Magistrate, No.30, Jaipur Metropolitan. The said court vide order
dated 10.4.2017 took cognizance of the offence under Section 211
IPC. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
offence under Section 211 IPC fall under Section 195 (1)(b)(i)
Cr.P.C. and qua this offence only complaint in writing could be filed
by the court and SHO could not lodge the report.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended
that the offence if any will fall under Section 182 IPC and not
under Section 211 IPC. The learned counsel for the petitioner has
further contended that for offence under Section 182 IPC, accused
can be convicted to maximum sentence of six months. It is further
submitted that as per Section 468 Cr.P.C., period of limitation to
prosecute the petitioner for offence under Section 182 IPC has
already expired.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has rightly
submitted that only qua offence under Section 182 IPC complaint
could be filed by SHO, as public servant, but the complaint qua
offence under Section 211 IPC because of bar prescribed under
Section 195 Cr.P.C. could only be filed by the concerned court.
I find merit in the submissions advanced by the learned
counsel for the petitioner.
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-3966/2018] Qua offence under Section 211 IPC, complaint could only be filed by the court which had accepted the Final Report in negative form. After acceptance of Final Report in respect of FIR No. 390/2015, registered at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur for the offences under Sections 323, 341, 379, 504 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, complaint could only be filed by the concerned court. SHO/investigating officer could only file complaint against the petitioner for offence under Sections 182 IPC but as already noted above, the period of limitation for prosecution of petitioner for offence under Section 182 IPC has already expired.
It is to be noted that the Final Report in negative form qua FIR lodged by the petitioner was accepted on 20.11.2015, therefore, the petitioner even now cannot be prosecuted for offence under Section 182 IPC because period of limitation to prosecute the petitioner has already expired.
Since, qua offence under Section 211 IPC complaint has not been filed by the concerned court and same cannot be initiated by the concerned SHO, the present petition is accepted and the proceedings under Section 211 IPC in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate No.30, Jaipur Metropolitan alongwith order of cognizance are set aside.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J Mak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)