Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 12, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Hemant Kuamr Suyan S/O Shri Ram Narayan ... vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 18 September, 2018

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                      BENCH AT JAIPUR

          S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5732/2018

Hemant Kumar Suyan S/o Shri Ram Narayan B/c Luhar, Aged About
36 Years, R/o House No.38, Harishchand Colony, Jhalra Patan, Ps
Jhalra Patan, District Jhalawar, Raj.

                                                              ----Petitioner

                                  Versus

State Of Rajasthan Through Pp, Rajasthan.

                                                            ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :   Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma
For Respondent(s)         :   Mr. Prakash Thakuriya, P.P.



     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

                                 / Order

18/09/2018

            Instant petition has been preferred under Section 482

Cr.P.C. to assail the order dated 14.07.2017 passed by the trial Court,

wherein cognizance of offence punishable under Section 211 I.P.C. has

been taken against the petitioner upon a complaint presented by S.H.O.

Police Station Jhalrapatan District Jhalawar.

            The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has

referred to Section 195 (1) (b) (i) Cr.P.C., to contend that the petitioner

can only be prosecuted for offence under Section 211 Cr.P.C. upon a

complaint filed in writing by the Court, qua which offence under Section

211 I.P.C. was committed.

            Counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the

accused-petitioner filed a criminal complaint under Section 156 (3)

Cr.P.C. for offences punishable under Sections 420, 384 and 120-B I.P.C.

Counsel has further submitted that during pendency of the said F.I.R.,

on 01.03.2017 an agreement was arrived at between the parties and
                                         (2 of 3)             [CRLMP-5732/2018]



after the compromise was affected, the petitioner and his wife - Meena

obtained decree of divorce under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage

Act. Counsel has contended that in the impugned F.I.R. lodged by the

petitioner, the Investigating Agency has submitted a Final Report in

negative form and the said Final Report in negative form was accepted

by the trial Court. Counsel has further contended that thereafter, on

14.07.2017, S.H.O. Police Station Jhalrapatan District Jhalawar has filed

a complaint for offence punishable under Section 211 I.P.C.

             Counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that after the

matrimonial dispute was resolved, the petitioner had withdrawn the

allegations against his wife and as a result of compromise, a Final

Report in negative form was submitted. Counsel further contends that

amicably resolution of the dispute will not lead to inference that the

petitioner had lodged false F.I.R.

             Having heard ld. counsel appearing for the parties, this

Court is of the view that for prosecution, qua offence under Section 211

I.P.C. complaint can only be filed by the Court, qua which offence under

Section 211 I.P.C. was committed.

             Section 195 Cr.P.C. reads as under :-
      "195. Prosecution for contempt of lawful authority of public
      servants, for offences against public justice and for offences
      relating to documents given in evidence.

      (1) ------------

      (a) (i) ----------------------

      (ii) -----------------

      (iii) ----------------

      (b) (i) of any offence punishable under any of the following
      sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ), namely, sections
      193 to 196 (both inclusive), 199, 200, 205 to 211 (both inclusive)
      and 228, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in,
      or in relation to, any proceeding in any Court, or

      (ii) -------------------

      (iii) -------------------------
                                                                            (3 of 3)                  [CRLMP-5732/2018]

                                           [except on the complaint in writing of that Court, or by such officer
                                           of the Court as that Court may authorise in writing in this behalf,
                                           or of some other Court to which that Court is subordinate.

                                           (2) ------------------

                                           -------------

(3) ------------------- (4) -----------------

--------------

(a) --------------

(b) ----------------"

It is apparent that offence under Section 211 I.P.C. falls under Section 195 (1) (b) (i) Cr.P.C. and, therefore, complaint can only be filed in the present case by the Court in writing and, hence, the petitioner could not be prosecuted in a complaint filed by S.H.O. of the Police Station, who is a public servant.
Consequently, the present petition is accepted and the impugned order dated 14.07.2017 passed by the trial Court is set aside. The trial Court may proceed with the complaint under Section 340 Cr.P.C., if it may deem it appropriate to be expedient to do so in the interest of justice.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J ashok Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)