The ingredients of the offences of assault or criminal force to a public servant under Section 353 IPC, assault under Section 352 IPC, and criminal intimidation under Section 506 IPC, and the application of these provisions to the facts of the case.

JUDGMENT :

G.B. Patnaik, J. - Accused in G.R. Case No. 158/84 in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khurda is the Petitioner invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court for quashing the order of cognisance dated 20th June, 1984 taking cognisance u/s 353 and 506 I.P.C. The process server by name Gadadhar Misra has been to village Lendu to serve a summon on the Petitioner in complaint case No. ICC 142/83 wherein the Petitioner was an accused. It was reported by the said process server that as the Petitioner refused to receive the summons, he hung the same on the wall of the Petitioner. The Petitioner thereafter filed an affidavit on 10.2.84 against the said process server that his report was completely false and conducted. The said process server made an application to the District Judge, alleging therein that on 12.2.84 at 3.30 P.M., while he was returning to Court after serving summons, the Petitioner met him near Khurda State Bank Chhak and rebuked him in obscene language in presence of two persons. The District Judge sent that application to the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate who in turn forwarded the same to the Officer-in-charge, Khurda Police Station to treat it as an F.I.R. and take necessary action. Subsequently Gadadhar Misra also gave a written report at Khurda Police Station. The Officer-in-charge, Khurda Police Station registered as case and started investigation. In course of investigation, statements of the two witnesses were recorded and on completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed on 11.5.84 against the Petitioner under Sections 353 and 506 I.P.C. On the basis of the said charge-sheet and on perusal of the supporting materials, the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate having been cognisance u/s 353 and 506 I.P.C. against the Petitioner, the present application has been filed for quashing the same.

2. Mr. Patnaik, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that the averments made in the application of Gadadhar Misra which has been treated as F.I.R. in the case together with the statements of the witnesses recorded by the police u/s 161 Code of Criminal Procedure during the investigation do not constitute the offence for which cognisance has been taken and, therefore, the said order of cognisance must be quashed.

3. The short question for consideration, therefore, is whether the allegations in the F.I.R. as well as the statements of witnesses recorded by the police during investigation constitute the offence in question or not, It has been alleged in the F.I.R. that an 12.2.84 at 3.30 P.M. the accused met the informant near the State Bank Chhak and started quarreling and abused him in obscene language and threatened that he would see the informant within 10 or 12 days, By such words and conduct of the accused, the informant was terrified and lost his prestige and reputation. The accused is alleged to have stated so in presence of Sashibhusan Patnaik of Khurda and Raghunath Patnaik of Baniatangi. Section 161 Code of Criminal Procedure, statements of those tow witnesses are to the affect that while the process server Gadadhar Misra was on his uniform, accused Braja Kishore stopped him on the road and enquired from him as to why he has given a false report against him. So saying the said accused Braja Kishore threatened him with dire consequences, abused him in filthy languages and said that he would take his job. As several others were present they all told the accused not to humuliate the process server in that manner on the road whereafter the accused left towards Khurda. The informant Gadadhar Misra in his statement u/s 161 Code of Criminal Procedure fully corroborated the statements in the F.I.R. It is now to be seen whether an offence u/s 353 as well as 506 I.P.C. can be stated to have been prima facie established justifying the Magistrate taking cognisance of the two offences.

4. Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of assault or use of criminal force to a