Madhya Pradesh High Court
Nandan Singh Tomar vs Bhim Singh on 7 February, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: G.S. Ahluwalia
1 MCRC No.41575/2019
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
BENCH GWALIOR
SINGLE BENCH:
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G.S. AHLUWALIA
M.Cr.C. No.41575/2019
.........Applicant(s): Nandan Singh Tomar & Others
Versus
.......Respondent(s) : Bheem Singh
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Awdhesh Singh Bhadoriya, Counsel for applicants.
Shri Rajmani Bansal, Counsel for respondent.
Ms. Kalpana Parmar, Counsel for State.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of hearing : 28/01/2022
Date of Order : 7th/02/2022
Whether approved for reporting :
ORDER
(7th /02/2022) (Through Video Conferencing) This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C has been filed against the order dated 30.08.2019 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge Ambah, District Morena in Criminal Revision No.121/2017, thereby setting aside the order dated 15.06.2017 passed by JMFC Ambah District Morena by which the complaint filed by respondent was dismissed under Section 203 of Cr.P.C. 2- The necessary facts for disposal of the present application in short, are that the respondent filed a criminal complaint on the 2 MCRC No.41575/2019 allegations that about 6 years back his daughter was married to applicant No.1. She was kept properly for some time but thereafter the applicant No.1 got job in Army. Thereafter the applicants started demanding Rs.5 Lacs and started harassing her on account of non- fulfillment of their demand. Even, a Panchayat was convened but it did not give any positive result. On 04.09.2015 at about 10:00 A.M., the complainant received an information that his daughter Shashi has committed suicide. They immediately rushed to the matrimonial house and found that the dead body of deceased Shashi was lying in the house and had injuries on her body. An information was given to the police. Specific allegations were made about the harassment but the Police in order to save the applicants did not mention the allegations made by the complainant. Thereafter, a complaint was made to the Superintendent of Police, Morena on 28.10.2015 but no action was taken, and accordingly, a complaint under Sections 302, 498-A/34, 201 of the IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act was filed. The Trial Magistrate after recording the statement of the witnesses dismissed the complaint under Section 203 of Cr.P.C. 3- Being aggrieved by the order passed by Trial Magistrate, the respondent preferred a revision before the Court of Second Additional Sessions Judge, Ambah, District- Morena (M.P.) which was registered as Criminal Revision No.121/2017 and by the impugned order, said revision has been allowed. The matter has been remanded back to the Trial Magistrate to re-consider the complaint on merits as Trial 3 MCRC No.41575/2019 Magistrate had rejected the complaint on the ground that since the charge-sheet under Section 306 of the IPC has been filed, therefore, the complaint is liable to be registered.
4- Challenging the order passed by the revisional Court, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that once the charge-sheet under Section 306 of the IPC was already filed, then the Trial Magistrate did not commit any mistake in rejecting the complaint.
5- Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6- The undisputed fact is that a complaint has been filed for the
offence under section 302 of IPC whereas the charge-sheet is pending for offence under Section 306 of IPC. Thus, it is clear that the applicants are not being prosecuted for offence under Section 302 of the IPC for which the complaint was filed. Section 210 of Cr.P.C reads as under :-
"210. Procedure to be followed when there is a complaint case and police investigation in respect of the same offence.-- (1) When in a case instituted otherwise than on a police report (hereinafter referred to as a complaint case), it is made to appear to the Magistrate, during the course of the inquiry or trial held by him, that an investigation by the police is in progress in relation to the offence which is the subject-matter of the inquiry or trial held by him, the Magistrate shall stay the proceedings of such inquiry or trial and call for a report on the matter from the police officer conducting the investigation. (2) If a report is made by the investigating police officer under Section 173 and on such report cognizance of any offence is taken by the 4 MCRC No.41575/2019 Magistrate against any person who is an accused in the complaint case, the Magistrate shall inquire into or try together the complaint case and the case arising out of the police report as if both the cases were instituted on a police report. (3) If the police report does not relate to any accused in the complaint case or if the Magistrate does not take cognizance of any offence on the police report, he shall proceed with the inquiry or trial, which was stayed by him, in accordance with the provisions of this Code."
7- The Supreme Court in the case of Kapil Agarwal Vs. Sanjay Sharma, reported in (2021) 5 SCC 524 has held as under :-
16. Thus, as per Section 210 CrPC, when in a case instituted otherwise than on a police report i.e. in a complaint case, during the course of the inquiry or trial held by the Magistrate, it appears to the Magistrate that an investigation by the police is in progress in relation to the offence which is the subject-matter of the inquiry or trial held by him, the Magistrate shall stay the proceedings of such inquiry or trial and call for a report on the matter from the police officer conducting the investigation. It also provides that if a report is made by the investigating police officer under Section 173 CrPC and on such report cognizance of any offence is taken by the Magistrate against any person who is an accused in the complaint case, the Magistrate shall inquire into or try together the complaint case and the case arising out of the police report as if both the cases were instituted on a police report. It also further provides that if the police report does not relate to any accused in the complaint case or if the Magistrate does not take cognizance of any offence on the police report, he shall proceed with the inquiry or trial, which was stayed by him, in accordance with the provisions of CrPC.
17. Thus, merely because on the same set of facts with the same allegations and averments earlier the complaint is filed, there is no bar to lodge the FIR with the police station with the same allegations and averments.5 MCRC No.41575/2019
8- Thus, the situation in hand is squarely covered by Section 210 (2) of Cr.P.C. In the present case, the prosecution of the applicants under Section 306 of IPC and allegations made against them in Criminal complaint are more or less similar i.e. the death of Shashi who is the wife of applicant No.1 but the only dispute is as to whether she had committed suicide because of abetment or she was killed. 9- Under these circumstances, the Trial Magistrate has committed a material illegality by rejecting the complaint by holding that since prosecution of the applicants for offence under Section 306 of the IPC is going on in a police case, therefore, the complaint is not required to be registered. The revisional Court has rightly directed the Trial Magistrate to consider the complaint on merits and if it is found that prima facie case is made out for issuance of summons, then further proceedings shall be taken up in accordance with section 210 (2) of Cr.P.C.
10- With aforesaid observations, the application is dismissed. 11- The Trial Magistrate is directed to decide the question of issuance of summons within a period of two months from today.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge (alok) ALOK KUMAR 2022.02.07 14:08:20 +05'30'