The legal point established in the judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to legal procedures in recording and using statements during investigation, and the limited role of the Judicial Magistrate in discharging the accused under section 302 IPC.

JUDGMENT :

P.S.RANA, J.

1. Present petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for quashing criminal proceedings and FIR No. 40 of 2011 dated 17.6.2011 registered under sections 302 and 506 IPC in criminal case No.31-R/7 of 2012 title State of HP Vs. Dalip Singh Himral @ Dainy. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

2. Tilak Raj filed FIR alleging therein that on dated 16.6.2011 at about 1.30 noon he received a phone call and he was informed by way of phone call that since night of 14th & 15th June 2011 deceased Kamlesh Kumar had left for his residential house. It is alleged that deceased Kamlesh Kumar did not reach in his residential house and on search it was found that motor cycle No. HP 06A-2293 and the bag of deceased were found at a place about ½ Km towards Pandoya in a lonely place. It is further alleged that deceased had love affairs with Prabha Devi since one year. It is further alleged that on 22.7.2011 dead body of deceased was found in Govind dam District Bilaspur H.P. It is further alleged that post mortem of deceased body was conducted on 23.7.2011 in regional hospital Bilaspur H.P. It is further alleged that investigation was handed over to State CID Bharari Shimla as per direction of police head quarter vide letter No. CB-3-19/11/2010-31699-31702 dated 11.8.2011. It is further alleged that on 29.9.2011 accused produced before learned Judicial Magistrate Rampur Bushahr District Shimla and investigating officer moved an application stating therein that there is no evidence against accused. It is further alleged that thereafter learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Rampur discharged accused qua offence punishable under sections 302 and 506 IPC on dated 29.9.2011. It is further alleged that thereafter cancellation report prepared but learned Director Prosecutor did not agree with cancellation report submitted by State CID Bharari Shimla. It is further alleged that thereafter further investigation under section 173 (8) Code of criminal procedure 1973 conducted as per direction of competent authority. It is further alleged that statement of Prabha Devi sole eye witness recorded under section 164 of the Code of criminal procedure 1973 and thereafter challan was filed against accused under sections 302 and 506 IPC.It is further alleged that thereafter on dated 17.10.2012 learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Rampur District Shimla HP committed the case under section 209 Cr.PC to learned Sessions Judge Kinnaur at Rampur for trial and thereafter learned Sessions Judge Kinnaur on dated 20.2.2014 held that there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against accused for criminal offence punishable under sections 302 and 506 IPC on the alleged facts that accused hit deceased Kamlesh with a stone on his head and when he become unconscious accused threw deceased in river Satluj and thereafter dead body of deceased was recovered on 22.7.2011 near Swarghat in District Bilaspur H.P and on the alleged additional facts that accused also intimidated Prabha Devi sole eye witness of incident and threatened her to kill her in case she disclosed the incident to anyone. Learned Sessions Judge Kinnaur at Rampur framed charge against accused under sections 302 and 506 IPC on dated 20.2.2014. Accused did not plead guilty and claimed trial. Thereafter accused challenged entire criminal proceedings under section 482 Cr.PC with prayer to quash entire criminal proceedings against accused pending before learned Sessions Judge Kinnaur at Rampur Bushahr.

3. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of non-petitioners and also perused entire record carefully.

4. Following points arise for determination in present petition:

1. Whether petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC is liable to be accepted as mentioned in memorandum of grounds of petition?

2. Final order.

Findings upon point No.1 with reasons.

5. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of accu