9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 1220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by Respondent 1 herein -Dr. Rajkumar Agarwal under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the Code ). By the impugned judgment, a learned Single Judge of the High Court has quashed the complaint filed against Respondent 1 by one Sohan Lal (the complainant) alleging that Respondent 1 demanded Rs. 5,000/- as illegal gratification for performing the operation of Smt. Sita Devi, whom he treated as his aunt. The question before this Court is whether the exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code by the High Court to quash the complaint was warranted in the facts of this case. 3. The facts, briefly stated, are as follows: Respondent 1 was working as Junior Specialist (Surgery), Government Hospital, Suratgarh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mr. Darshan Singh, Assistant Engineer and Mr. Kripal Singh, Assistant Project (Samanvayak) Office, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Sriganganagar were introduced to the complainant. Currency notes of Rs. 1,500/- produced by the complainant which were to be handed over to the Appellant were smeared with phenolphthalein powder. The necessary procedure was followed. A new blank cassette was inserted in the tape recorder and it was handed over to the complainant. On 12/12/2007, the Additional Superintendent of Police along with the complainant, the two independent witnesses and Ors. left for Suratgarh. The complainant was given necessary direction for contacting Respondent 1. The trap party waited there. The complainant came out of the residence of Respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rial collected by the prosecution prima facie make out a strong case against Respondent 1. 7. Mr. Pallav Shishodia, learned senior advocate for Respondent 1, on the other hand, submitted that the High Court has rightly quashed the complaint. He pointed out that Smt. Sita Devi was not related to the complainant. Therefore, the complainant's case that he went to Respondent 1 in connection with the uterus operation of Smt. Sita Devi and the amount was demanded by Respondent 1 from him is inherently improbable. Counsel submitted that the complainant owns a Chemist shop near the hospital in which Respondent 1 is working. The complainant does not have the necessary licence to run the Chemist shop. The illegalities committed by the complain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court may take a kindly view of the matter. Counsel submitted that in the facts of this case, ends of justice would be met if the High Court's order is confirmed. 8. We find no substance in Mr. Shishodia's submissions. It is true that the complainant is not related to Smt. Sita Devi but nothing has been brought on record to even prima facie establish that the complainant holds any grudge against Respondent 1 because Respondent 1 had knowledge about the alleged irregularities in respect of his Chemist shop. Since Mr. Shishodia has referred to statements of Smt. Sita Devi and Navrang Lal recorded under Section 161 of the Code, we have perused them. In these statements, Smt. Sita Devi and Navrang Lal have stated that the complainan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. Apart from these statements there is another prima facie clinching circumstance against the Appellant. The police claim that they have taped the conversation between Respondent 1 and the complainant. We have read the transcript of this tape recorded conversation. It is not possible for us to agree with the High Court that the transcription does not corroborate the FIR. Prima facie, we feel that if it is read against the background of the other facts, it is apparent that it relates to the operation of Smt. Sita Devi and the demand pertains to the said operation. Besides, according to the prosecution, the trap was successful. Money smeared with phenolphthalein powder was found with Respondent 1. The notes recovered from the Respondent 1 ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to procure affidavits of witnesses during investigation or during court proceedings and get the FIR and the proceedings quashed. Such a practice would lead to frustrating prosecution of serious cases. We are therefore, wary of relying on such affidavits. So far as the judgment cited by Mr. Shishodia in V.P. Shrivastava is concerned, it is purely on facts and can have no application to this case. Shiji @ Pappu also does not help Respondent 1. That case involved a civil dispute. Parties had settled their civil dispute and therefore, the complainant was not ready to proceed with the proceedings. It is against this background that in Shiji @ Pappu, this Court held that exercise of power under Section 482 of the Code was justifiable. However, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
