9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 1099X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rsons to leave the area and a heated verbal exchanged ensued. The petitioner then emerged from the house. As per prosecution case, the petitioner, having abused the media persons, exhorted his security personnel to thrash them. Thereafter, the security personnel started hitting the journalists and the petitioner himself assaulted the complainant Isran Ahmed. The complainant Isran Ahmed lodged the FIR No. 248/96 at the P.S. Tughlak Road. Investigation pursuant thereto culminated in submission of a charge sheet under Sections 147/149/323/506/354 IPC against the petitioner and Ms. Mayawati. The petitioner and Ms. Mayawati, filed an application before the learned Magistrate seeking discharge from the proceedings. By the order dated 31.3.1999 the learned Magistrate discharged the co-accused Ms. Mayawati but he rejected the petitioner's prayer on the ground that materials collected by the prosecuting agency make out a prima facie case under Sections 147/149/323/506/354 IPC against the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed a revision petition before this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 9.9.1999. Thereafter, the petitioner challenged the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any basic infirmities appearing in the case and so on. In Satish Mehra Vs . Delhi Administration, (1996)9SCC766 , it was held that if the court is almost certain that there is no prospect of the case ending in conviction and the trial would be an exercise in futility or sheer wastage of time, it is advisable to truncate or snip the proceedings at the stage of Section 227 of the Code itself. Bearing in mind the said principles of law, I shall proceed to consider the facts and circumstances of the case and examine them on the scale of law. 5. It is significant to mention that only two persons, namely, Ms. Mayawati (since discharged) and the petitioner were charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 147/149 IPC. By the impugned order, learned Magistrate has discharged the accused Ms. Mayawati holding that she was not the member of the alleged unlawful assembly. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that petitioner alone cannot be charged for committing the offence of rioting punishable under Section 147 IPC or for the offence punishable under Section 149 IPC. It is well settled that Section 149 IPC create a specific offence and de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ausing simple injuries to him. In this context, a reference to the FIR lodged by the petitioner's security-incharge, Padam Singh is indispensable. It is an admitted position that on the same day, Padam Singh had also lodged a report at the P.S. Tuglak Road regarding the alleged incident and investigation pursuant there to had culminated in submission of a charge sheet under Section 451/323/147/353/332/149/186 IPC against some of the journalists assembled at the spot. 8. According to the FIR lodged by the security-in-charge Padam Singh, on 25.10.1996, some 30/40 anti-social elements along with media persons had assembled at the official residence of the petitioner. At about 4.15 p.m. while the petitioner and Ms. Mayawati were going to attend an urgent meeting, the persons assembled there broke the security carbon and herald them for their statements but they declined to make any press statement saying that they had not invited media persons for a press conference. Incensed by this, the persons assembled there used filthy language and raised slogans against the petitions and Ms. Mayawati. When the security personnel tried to reinforce the security carbon, they were assaulted b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... harged by the learned Magistrate. 9. Coming to the individual acts of the petitioner, the learned Magistrate opined that there is sufficient material on record for presuming that the petitioner has also committed the offences punishable under Sections 506/354/323 IPC. As regards the offence under Section 354 IPC, Ms. Renuka Puri has nowhere stated in her statement that the petitioner had assaulted or used criminal force to her intending to outrage her modesty. That being so, the charge under Section 354 IPC leveled against the petitioner falls to the ground. 10. So far as the offence under Section 506 IPC is concerned, the complainant Isran Ahmed stated in his case diary statement that at the relevant time the petitioner had exhorted his security personnel to thrash the journalists. According to Isran Ahmed, the exact words used by the petitioner were Maro Salon Ko . Strangely enough, Isran Ahmed has nowhere stated in his statement that the alleged threat had caused an alarm to him. On the contrary the circumstances of the case clearly go to show that even after the alleged threat, the complainant or other media persons did not retrace their steps. It is well settled that mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
