A threat which does not cause alarm is not a threat at all.

M.L.Singhal, J.

1. This criminal Revision is directed against the order of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Anandpur Sahib dated 22.5.1996 whereby he refused to frame charge against the respondent and discharged him in criminal complaint No. 102 of 22.10.94 titled Surinder Gupta wife of Prem Kumar v. D.P. Goel, Executive Engineer, Reservoir Management, Division, Nangal Township, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib, Distt. Ropar. Facts of the complaint are as follows.

2. Smt. Surinder Gupta wife of Prem Kumar instituted the aforesaid complaint under Sections 166, 500, 506, 511 IPC read with Section 120-B, IPC against Shri D.P. Goel, accused on the allegations that her father-in-law had authored some corruption cases against the officers of BBMB. So that her father-in-law felt dissuaded from pursuing corruption cases against the officers of BBMB, her husband Prem Kumar was transferred from Chandigarh to Nangal. Her husbands transfer from Chandigarh did not deter her father-in-law from exposing them so far as their conduct was concerned. They could not succeed in their illegal designs through the instrumentality of the transfer of her husband. D.P. Goel conspired with his subordinates and with a view to harass her husband further, he not only directed Shri Jagat Ram, Head Clerk of his office to mark Prem Kumar as absent from duty though he was present. Some times, the accused himself marked her husband absent in the duty register and some times he got him marked absent through Jagat Ram, Head Clerk. Act of marking her husband absent from duty in the duty register when he was present, aggravated the harassment he was feeling already and he began suffering from serious mental depression and agony. Prem Kumar continued attending the office and performing his job and his father continued pursuing corruption cases against the officers of the BBMB, the accused D.P. Goel became infuriated to such an extent that one day when Prem Kumar attended the office and requested that he should be marked present when he was attending the office regularly, accused abused Prem Kumar in the name of his mother and sister in the presence of Jagat Ram, Head Clerk and his other colleagues. Accused threatened Prem Kumar to leave his office immediately otherwise he would put him to death. Prem Kumar left the office of the accused immediately due to the fear of the threat of death given to him by the accused. When Prem Kumar left the office of the accused, the accused directed Jagat Ram that in Prem Kumar ever entered his room, he should be stabbed at his face or any other part of the body. He further directed Jagat Ram that he should put Prem Kumar to death and he (accused) would be responsible for his criminal act. It was further alleged that on account of the fear of the threat of murder by the accused and also on account of mental harassment and mental agony created by the accused to Prem Kumar through his subordinates and through his own acts, Prem Kumar lost his brain. Despite her representations to Deputy Commissioner, Ropar; Governor of Punjab; Home Minister, Govt. of India; Senior Superintendent of Police, Ropar; DGP, Punjab; no case was registered against the accused. Her representations have been thrown in waste paper baskets. After recording preliminary evidence, accused was summoned for trial by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Anandpur Sahib.

3. With a view to sustain the allegations of the complaint, the complainant examined Jagat Ram, PWl, Ram Chand, PW2, Raj Kumar Senior Assistant RM Division, PW3. Besides she put herself into the witness box.

4. Vide the impugned order, the Magistrate discharged the accused as in his opinions no case was made out against the accused so that he could be charged.

5. Fate of the complaint hinged on the lone statement of Jagat Ram, PW 1. So far as Smt. Surinder Gupta wife of Prem Kumar is concerned, she is not an eye witness to any of the incidents. Hers is hear-say evidence. Jagat Ram has stated that he wa