Interference is generally not warranted if a prima facie case is made out, and mere allegations of malafide may not be a ground for intervention at the stage of section 482 of the Code.

JUDGMENT : :

Ravindra Maithani, J.

The instant petition has been filed for setting aside the summoning and cognizance order dated 10.09.2021 passed in Criminal Case No. 1962 of 2021, State Vs. Pappu Giri and others, under sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar. (for short “the case”)

2. Facts necessary, to appreciate the controversy, briefly stated, as follows;

The respondent no. 3 Sanjay Bharti filed an FIR against the petitioners on 15.12.2019 at 03:37 p.m. under sections 147, 148, 323, 354, 452, 504 and 506 IPC at Police Station Kotwali Roorkee. According to the FIR, the petitioner no. 2 used to molest the wife of the respondent no. 3 (the informant). On 12.12.2019 at 06:30 also the petitioner no. 2 Pappu Giri hold the wife of the informant by her chest and started molesting her. Upon alarm having been raised by the wife of the informant, some persons gathered there. Thereafter, at about 07:00 in the morning, the petitioners armed with lathi, danda and saria entered into the house of the informant, abused him and assaulted the informant and his family members. It is this FIR, in which, after investigation, chargesheet under sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC has been submitted. On 10.09.2021, cognizance has been taken and the petitioners have been summoned to answer the accusation.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the instant case is totally fake and a counterblast to the FIR lodged by petitioner no. 3. It is argued that, in fact, the sons of the informant had a small altercation with the villagers in a marriage on 11.12.2019, which was settled by the local residents. But, due to this reason, the informant and his family members had become inimical to the petitioners. On 12.12.2019 at 09:30 A.M., the informant and his family members armed with lathi, danda, saria and other sharp-edged weapons, entered into the house of the petitioner no. 3, assaulted her and her family members, due to which, the petitioner no. 2 and his father sustained serious injuries.

5. Learned counsel would further submit that in the FIR lodged by petitioner no. 3, after investigation, chargesheet has already been submitted. The petitioner and his family members have sustained injuries with sharp-edged weapons. It is argued that once FIR was lodged by petitioner no. 3, as a counterblast the informant lodged a false report of an alleged incident of 07:00 in the morning of the same day i.e. on 12.12.2019. But, it is argued that the Police after investigation did not find the FIR filed by the informant true with regard to the offences under section 354 and 452 IPC which were the main offences levelled by the informant.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that this case is squarely covered by the principles as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and Others Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335.

7. On the other hand, learned State Counsel would submit that there is no illegality in the order taking cognizance and summoning the petitioners. After investigation, chargesheet has been submitted. There are specific averments and specific roles.

8. This is a petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The scope is quite wide but much guided by the principles of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in various judgments. Reference has been made to the judgment in the case of Bhajan Lal (supra). In the case of Bhajan Lal (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court while interpreting the scope under section 482 of the Code, in paragraph 102 has illustratively given the situations where jurisdiction could be invoked. In paragraph 102 of the judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as hereunder;

“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law