Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Deepak Gupta, J.
Harinder Kumar - Petitioner - Appellant
Versus
Rohit Yadav and another - Respondents - Respondent
CRM-M-12515 of 2016
Decided On : 09-02-2023
Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Quashing of summoning order - Sections 193, 203, 204 and 120-B IPC - [Sections 193, 203, 204, 120-B IPC] - The court discussed the applicability of Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the interpretation of key legal provisions, and the influence of previous case laws on the decision.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash the summoning order against him for offences under Sections 193, 203, 204, and 120-B IPC related to the handling of diaries and evidence in a criminal case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the bar under Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure did not apply to all the offences, and the petitioner's petition was dismissed.
Issues: The key issue was the applicability of Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the offences under Sections 193, 203, 204, and 120-B IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the bar of Section 195(1)(b)(i) did not apply to all the offences, and it was possible to split the separate offences, thus the petition was dismissed.
Final Decision: The petition seeking to quash the summoning order was dismissed.
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.
Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to quash the order dated 25.01.2016 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, dismissing the revision of the petitioner against summoning order dated 23.01.2013 (Annexure P-2), whereby petitioner was summoned to face trial for commission of offences under Sections 193, 203, 204 and 120-B IPC in a criminal complaint case No.234 of 2012 titled as “Rohit Yadav v. Amar Singh and others” (Annexure P-3), under Sections 191, 195, 201, 219 and 120-B IPC.
2. As emerges from the paper book, Pooja Yadav D/o Amar Singh was married to Ravi Shankar on 18.11.2011. She died unnatural death on 06.07.2012. On the complaint of Amar Singh (father of the deceased), FIR No.210, dated 06.07.2012 under Section 498-A and 304-B/34 IPC was registered against her husband Ravi Shankar, brother-in-law Rohit Yadav (respondent herein), mother-in-law Smt. Manju and father-in-law Prem Shankar Yadav. Admittedly, after trial, all the said accused were acquitted vide judgment dated 21.04.2014 (Annexure P-4), against which criminal appeal bearing CRA-D-1151-DB-2014 filed by the State as well as Amar Singh is stated to be pending before this High Court.
3. (i) Rohit Yadav, (respondent No.1 herein), brother-in-law of deceased lodged a complaint on 22.11.2012 against Amar Singh (father of deceased), Inspector Harinder Kumar, Supervising Officer of the investigation (petitioner herein), ASI Rajender Singh (Investigating Officer of the case) and Ashok Bakshi, ACP, Gurgaon (Monitoring Officer of the case). It was alleged in the complaint that deceased Pooja was under depression for various reasons and used to attend Art of Living classes. Under counseling, she used to write personal diaries mentioning therein her personal feelings. On getting information about the suicide of Pooja Yadav, her husband Ravi Shankar, an Advocate by profession along with Prashant Yadav, Advocate under whom he was working, came to the spot and shifted Pooja Yadav to Aryan Hospital, where she was declared brought dead. The police as well as relatives of the deceased also reached the hospital. On that day itself, petitioner Harinder Kumar took the complaint i.e. Rohit Yadav to the house and seized the same with a lock and brought him back to the hospital.
(ii) On 08.07.2012, Prashant Yadav, Advocate was called to the Police Station by ASI Rajender Singh and informed that they had inspected the place of occurrence, captured photographs and had lifted few diaries and the chhuni (ligature material). Said fact was confirmed by Smt. Jyoti Yadav, the landlady of the house, where deceased along with her matrimonial family used to reside to the effect that police had lifted a few diaries from the room of deceased Pooja Yadav. On 09.07.2012, ASI Rajender Singh showed four diaries lifted from the spot to Prashant Yadav in the police station, which contained the inner feelings of the deceased as to how she was depressed and that she was ending her life at her own. The contents of the diaries also revealed some recipes of cooking and the notes regarding course of Art of Living etc. Prashant Yadav read over the diaries to Inspector Harinder Kumar loudly. A seizure memo regarding those four diaries and the ligature material i.e chuuni was prepared by ASI Rajender Singh on the direction of Inspector Harinder Kumar (petitioner herein) and the same was dully signed by Prashant Yadav and Constable Ashwani.
(iii) As police was not investigating the matter in the light of contents of the diaries containing the suicide note, Prashant Yadav along with Vinod Rao visited the office of ACP Ashok Bakshi, where they saw the four diaries in question lying on his table. Pleading pressure of higher authorities, ACP Ashok Bakshi asked them for surrendering of Ravi Shankar i.e husband of the deceased, assuring that diaries will be taken on record. Application for seeking anticipatory bail was filed by husband and mother-in-law of
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the offences under Sections 193, 203, 204, and 120-....
(1) Perjury – Section 195(1)(b)(ii) read with Section 340(1), Cr.P.C. will only apply in respect of offences which are committed during the time when document concerned was custodia legis or in custo....
(1) Any aggrieved person can alert court about commission of a crime committed with intent to mislead court or to scuttle proceedings pending before it.(2) If other offences are interwoven and insepa....
Section 415 of IPC mandates that there should be inducement from hands of accused to victim to part with any property and transaction should be tainted with dishonest intention right from its outset.
The court ruled that allegations leading to remand and bail proceedings constitute jurisdictional grounds under S.195(1)(b), requiring a court complaint for cognizance of related offences.
Point of Law : Transactions that attract the offence under section 193 of the IPC and the other offences not covered under section 195 of Cr.P.C are inseparable.
Section 195 has been enacted mainly to regulate and control prosecutions in respect of offences against administration of justice and contempt of lawful authority.
Smuggling of gold – Cognizance of offence - Case squarely falls within the category of cases falling under Section 195(1)(b)(i) CrPC as the offence is punishable under Section 193 IPC. Therefore, the....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
