Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

7. It is well settled proposition of law that at the stage of summoning, the material on record is not required to be weighed threadbare with minute details by the court. In other words, it is a prima facie case which has to be seen by the court at the stage of summoning and the probative value of the material on record is not to be assessed from the perspective of a full proof case. In the instant case, the material as discussed above prima facie shows that the accused in conspiracy with each other procured bogus votes at multiple addresses on the basis of a forged ration card no.4285832 electricity bills etc. In these circumstances, prima facie it appears that the accused in conspiracy with each other procured false documents with intent to cause injury to the public at large as well as to the rivals in the elections and thereby committed an offence of forgery for the purpose of cheating.

35. The Magistrate did not send the complaint (Annexure P-1) under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for registration of FIR and investigation, vide order dated 19.08.2013 and fixed the case for preliminary evidence of the complainant.

36. Thereafter, on 14.10.2013, the complainant examined 4 CWs, apart from relying on large number of documents which had been 28 of 81 CRM-M-53599-2018 and other connected cases -29- appended alongwith the complaint and which would be clear from the record, details of which, however, had also not been mentioned in Annexure P-1. The Magistrate while referring to the statements of the said witnesses and allegations levelled, came to the conclusion that there was sufficient material on record to proceed against the accused since a prima facie case was made out, as bogus votes on the basis of forged and illegal ration cards and false documents had been procured, in conspiracy to cause injury to the public at large and his rivals in the elections. It was also observed that multiple votes had been made by accused no.1 & 2, which is the main plank of argument of counsel for the petitioner that nothing of the same was on record. Relevant portion of the reasoning given in the summoning order reads as under:-

29 of 81 CRM-M-53599-2018 and other connected cases -30- bearing No.406494 having the address as # 1442, Near Saini Chaupal, Gurgaon. Prima facie it appears that the accused in conspiracy with each other procured false documents with interest to cause injury to the public at large as well as to the rivals in the elections and thereby committed an offence of forgery for the purpose of cheating."

48. The complaint (Annexure P-1) was not sent to the police for registration of FIR and investigation, though a request had been made on 07.09.2013 and case was fixed for preliminary evidence of the complainant. The complainant examined himself on 31.10.2013 and thereafter examined three witnesses on 16.05.2014. The summoning order was passed on 02.11.2015 (Annexure P-2). The reasoning given in the said order reads as under:-

"12. At that stage of summoning, the materials on record is not required to be weighed threadbare with minute details by the Court. On the other hand, at this stage, the material on record has to be looked into from the angle as to whether there is sufficient material to proceed against the accused for the commission of the alleged offences. In other words, it is a prima facie case which has to be seen by the court at the stage of summoning and the probative value of the material on record is not to be assessed from the perspective of a full proof case. In the instant case, the material as discussed above, prima facie shows that the accused in conspiracy with each other procured bogus votes at multiple addresses on the basis of forged ration card and such votes would not have been issued in favour of the accused no.1 to 6 and 8 by the competent authority if it were not deceived by the dishonest intention emanating from accused no.1 to 6 and 8. Since the multiple votes were procured on the basis of forged and illegal ration card. Prima facie it appears that the all accused except in accused no.7 and 44 of 81 CRM-M-53599-2018 and other connected cases -45- 9 in conspiracy with each other procured false documents with interest to cause injury to the public at large as well as to the rivals in the elections and thereby committed an offence of forgery for the purpose of cheating.