Smt. Fool Jahan vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 1486 UK

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

        Criminal Misc. Application No.2 of 2017
            (Under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C)

Smt. Fool Jahan                                ........Applicant

                              Versus

State of Uttarakhand & others             ........Respondents


Present:-
      Ms. Suraiya Naaz, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Lalit
      Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
      Mr. K.S. Rawal, learned A.G.A. for the State.
      Mr. Deep Chandra Joshi, learned counsel for respondent
      nos.2 to 10.

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

            The   instant     C482     application   has    been
preferred    against    the    judgment    and    order    dated

30.11.2016, passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani (Nainital) in Criminal Revision No.103 of 2015, Irshad & others vs. State of Uttarakhand, whereby the summoning order dated 17.07.2015, passed by learned 2nd Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District Nainital in Criminal Case No. 1537 of 2015 has been quashed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The facts of the case in brief are that a Criminal Case No.1537 of 2015 has been filed by Smt. Fool Jahan against nine persons alleging that on 28.02.2014 at about 3:00 p.m., the brother-in-law (Jeth) of the complainant and nephew of the complainant beaten up by the accused persons Furkan, Rizwan, Irfan, Ilias, Naushad, Dilshad @ Irshad, but due to the negotiation made by the relatives, a compromise has been entered into between the parties. When the incident came to the

knowledge of Smt. Haneefa and Smt. Kaneeta Bano, sisters-in-law (Nanad) of the complainant, they came to Haldwani for inquiring about the welfare of the family members on 01.3.2014 at about 2:00 p.m. and suggested to take legal action against the accused persons. After hearing the aforesaid, the accused persons got provoked and Rizwan, Furkan and Irfan barged inside the house armed with Danda and committed Marpeet. Along with them, Irshaad @ Dilshad also entered into the house and committed Marpeet with Haneefa and Kaneeta Bano. According to the complainant, the report was submitted to the police, but the police did nothing. The complaint was filed against the accused persons in the court of learned Second Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, in which the summons were issued. The family members put pressure upon the complainant to withdraw the complaint, but she did not budge to the illegal pressure of compromise. Due to this reason, they entertained enmity with the complainant. It is said that on 10.06.2014 at about 3/4 p.m. all the accused persons with a common object came at the house of the complainant at Indranagar, Haldwani armed with Danda and Rizwan, Naushad and Azim were having the acid bottles in their hands. They threatened the husband of the complainant, who was sitting in the shop with acid attack. On hearing commotion and alarm raised by the complainant, her mother-in-law Rehmat Jahan and others came on the spot. Irshad poured acid upon the husband of the complainant and in this, the bottle of acid was broken resulting burn injuries by acid upon some other persons.

4. According to the complainant, in this incident her husband and her mother-in-law were also got

injuries, as they were beaten up by Furkan, Irfan and Ilias. The complainant also sustained acid injuries. The contractor- Laek and Azim also threatened them with life and robbed Rs.18,000/- from the shop of the husband of the complainant. They also robbed ten cansters of ghee amounting to Rs.24,000/- and other articles from the shop. The complainant and his family members were immediately rushed up to the hospital. According to the complainant, his mother-in-law-Rehmat Jahan and husband were admitted in Soban Singh Jina Base Hospital where they got treatment. It is the allegation of the complainant that since the PS Haldwani was not investigating the matter correctly rather they arrested the husband of the complainant, she filed the complaint dated 13.05.2015 in the court of IInd Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District Nainital.

5. The complainant examined herself as PW1 under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and also got examined the witnesses-Mohd. Jaki as CW1, Smt. Rehmat Jahan as CW2, Dr. Rajat Kumar Bhatt as CW3 and Dr. Bhawna Jangpangi as CW4, in order to prove the allegations made in the complaint against the accused persons.

6. The learned Magistrate after hearing the complainant and going through the material available on record, took cognizance in the matter and summoned the respondents-accused under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504 & 506 IPC vide summoning order dated 17.07.2015.

7. The respondents-accused challenged the summoning order dated 17.07.2015, by filing a Criminal Revision No. 103 of 2015, in the court of learned First Additional District and Sessions Judge, Haldwani. The

learned Additional Sessions Judge vide judgment and order dated 30.11.2016 has allowed the criminal revision preferred by the respondents-accused and set-aside the summoning order dated 17.07.2015, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate. Thus, feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the revisional court, the applicant, who is the complainant in a Criminal Case No.1537 of 2015, has preferred this C482 application as stated above.

8. During the course of hearing of the revision, the fact has been advanced on behalf of the State that for the incident of 10.06.2014, a session trial was pending against the husband of the complainant-Mohd. Jaki and mother-in-law of the complainant-Rehmat Jahan. In the said Session trial they are being tried for the reason that they made an acid attack upon several ladies and children and upon the respondents-accused and they suffered burn injuries due to this acid attack. The explanation for injuries sustained by the complainant has been explained by the respondents-accused that the injuries sustained by him were due to the use of acid when it was thrown upon the respondents-accused persons and many others.

9. According to the statement recorded during the pre-summoning stage of Dr. Rajat Kumar Bhatt as CW3 and Dr. Bhawna Jangpangi as CW4, Mohd. Jaki, S/o Mohd. Shafi, husband of the complainant was examined by them in Soban Singh Jina Base Hospital on 11.06.2014 at 08:15 and Smt. Rehmat Jahan, W/o Mohd. Shafi, mother-in-law of the complainant, was examined for injuries on 12.06.2014 at Women Hospital, Haldwani.

The learned Additional Sessions Judge for these two reasons disbelieved the story given by the applicant for the reason that in the compliant as well as in the statement recorded under Sections 200 Cr.P.C. and 202 of Cr.P.C., it has been stated that on the same day when they went to the hospital, the robbery was committed by the respondent-accused persons. Owing to these serious contradictions in the story of the complainant as set out in the complaint, the learned Additional Sessions Judge came to this conclusion that the learned Magistrate while taking cognizance of the matter and summoning the respondents-accused has in a very cursory manner and without given due weightage to the evidence adduced by the complainant, has wrongly summoned the respondents-accused and consequently, set-aside the summoning order.

10. This Court, having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going to the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr. P.C. of the witnesses, is in agreement with the findings recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. In view of the material available on record, there is no infirmity in the judgment and order dated 30.11.2016 by which this summoning order dated 17.07.2015 was set-aside.

11. This Court also finds favour with the argument advanced on behalf of the respondents-accused that the complaint was simply instituted, in order to exert pressure upon the respondents-accused, who were injured in the acid attack. It was also brought to the notice of this Court by learned counsel for the private respondents that the Sessions Trial No.102 of 2014, State

vs. Mohd. Jaki and another resulted into the conviction of the accused. It is also informed that the appeal against the judgment and order by which the husband of the complainant-Mohd. Jaki and mother-in-law-Rehmat Jahan were convicted, is pending before this Court.

12. In this view of the matter, there is no merit in the C482 application, filed by the applicant. Consequently, the C482 application is dismissed. The judgment and order dated 30.11.2016, passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani (Nainital) in Criminal Revision No.103 of 2015, Irshad & others vs. State of Uttarakhand, is hereby affirmed.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 25.05.2023 AK