SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(MP) 737

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sushil Kumar Palo, J.
Renu Sharma (Smt.) v. Atul Bhargav
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.18509 of 2016 (J);
Decided on 7.9.2017

Advocates:
Sankalp Kochar for petitioner; Mujahid Ali Khan for respondent No.1; S.K. Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for respondent No.2/State.

Headnote:Criminal P.C., 1973 -- S.311 -- Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss.427, 457, 323, 506Pt.I r/w S.34 -- criminal complaint case was filed by respondent/complainant against petitioner/accused and her mother -- veracity of statement of complainant and his witnesses has to be verified -- for just decision of the case -- witnesses and call details of complainant may be called. AIR 1954 SC 455 followed. 1980 MPLJ 300 and 2007(1) MPLJ 84 relied on. [Paras 12, 14 & 15

       naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & /kkjk 311 & naM lafgrk] 1860 & /kkjk 427] 457] 323] 506 Hkkx 1 lgifBr /kkjk 34 & izR;FkhZ@ifjoknh }kjk ;kph@vfHk;qDr rFkk mldh ek¡ ds fo#) vkijkf/kd ifjokn ekeyk Qkby fd;k & ifjoknh rFkk mlds lk{khx.k ds dFku dh lR;rk lR;kfir dh tkuk gS & ekeys ds U;k;laxr fofu'p; ds fy, & lk{khx.k rFkk ifjoknh ds dkWy fMVsYl cqyk, tk ldrs gSaA , vkb vkj 1954 ,l lh 455 vuqlfjrA 1980 ,e ih ,y ts 300 rFkk 2007 ¼1½ ,e ih ,y ts 84 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 12] 14 ,oa 15½

ORDER

1. This petition under section 482 of CrPC has been filed to assail the order dated 15.9.2016 passed by the First ASJ, Chhindwara in Criminal Revision No.2500078/2016, wherein the order dated 3.8.2016 passed by JMFC, Chhindwara in Criminal Case No.1206/2010 has been affirmed.

2. Brief facts of the case requisite for disposal of this petition are that, the petitioner is facing trial under sections 427, 457, 323, 506-I read with section 34 of IPC. In the complaint case, after the examination of the accused, petitioner filed an application for examining herself and calling Subodh Malviya, Head Constable incharge of the Cyber Cell in the office of Superintendent of Police, Chhindwara to bring with him the details of Atul Bhargava Mobile No.9826147899 to Mobile No.9425306129, call details of Prashant Mobile No.942469919 and Shiv Saxena Mobile No.9425146706. The said application was disallowed by learned JMFC on 3.8.2016. The same was agitated in Criminal Revision No.2500078/2016 was filed before First ASJ, Chhindwara, wherein the same has been disallowed on 15.9.2016.

3. Brief facts just necessary for disposal of this petition are that, criminal complaint case has been filed by Atul Bhargava against the petitioner and her mother Kusum Sharma on the ground that there was an agreement between the parties for running the Abhimanyu Hotel and 12 Cottages. The complainant was living in a room in that hotel. The accused No.1 is the wife of the Director of the Abhimanyu Hotel Ltd. and mother of the accused No.1. There was a dispute between them. After the order from the Court, the complainant was running the business of the hotel since 18.6.2007. When the complainant and his wife were sleeping in their room, on 14.2.2010 around the midnight, suddenly the accused persons entered into the room with four other members, who said to be police personnel wearing Khaki dress. The accused persons abusing the complainant by obscene words, damage the furnitures and caused loss about Rs.15,000/-. They also threatened the complainant to vacate the hotel or else they will be dealt with and threatened of his life. At that time, the accused persons assaulted the complainant. The complainant rang up to Prashant and Shiv Saxena and called them. In presence of Prashant and Shiv Saxena also the accused persons uttered obscene words and threatened him of his life. With the intervention of Shiv Saxena and Prashant, the complainant and his wife could be saved. The accused persons also threatened complainant's wife of her life. On lodging complaint at police station, Kundipura, no report was lodged, therefore, a private complaint has been filed.

4. The petitioner/accused claimed that during the examination of the accused, question No.20 was asked about calling Prashant and Shiv Saxena by the complainant. In her plea in the examination of the accused, the petitioner has stated that her husband is the owner of the Abhimanyu Hotel Ltd. which is run by her. The complainant and other members entered into the hotel and assaulted the petitioner and her mother-in-law and also damaged the properties of the hotel. A civil case is also pending with regard to the dispute. Therefore, false complaint has been initiated by Atul Bhargava.

5. It is further claimed that in this background, this application for calling the call details was felt necessary and to prove the veracity of the statement of the complainant, the same is required.

6. It would be appropriate to note that the petitioner's application for examining the petitioner has been allowed by the learned JMFC vide order dated 3.8.2016 under section 315 of CrPC Prayer for calling Subodh Malviya, Head Constable with the call details of Atul, Prashant and Shiv Saxena in the intervening night on 14.2.2010 and 15.2.2010 has been prayed.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the contentions and submits that, earlier Atul, Prashant and Shiv Saxena has been examined by the complainant and no such questions













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top