Devendra Mehra & another v. Presence

Chandra lodged aFIR No. 36/2023 on 28.06.2023 at 00:17 hours alleging that on 27.06.2023 at about 8:30–9:00 PM, while he was present near his barrack in Kotwali Bhowali, the Applicants in an inebriated condition assaulted him, abused him in filthy language, threatened him with dire consequences, and vandalised the property of the police station. 1 Criminal Misc. Application No. 80 of 2024------Devendra Mehra and another v. State of Uttarakhand & Another Ashish Naithani J.

3. During the investigation, the police recorded the statements of Constable Hayat Chandra, Inspector Umesh Malik, Constable Gopal Singh, Constable Ajay Kumar and others, besides securing a medical examination of the complainant. It is further stated that CCTV footage of Kotwali Bhowali allegedly shows the Applicants jostling with police personnel and damaging the property. On the basis of such material, a charge-sheet was submitted and cognizance taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital.

4. It is, however, contended on behalf of the Applicants that on the very same evening, i.e., 27.06.2023, around 7–8 PM, Applicant No. 1 Devendra was seriously injured in a quarrel at Suraj Bar & Restaurant.

5. The injured, Applicant No. 1 Devendra, was promptly taken to CHC, Bhowali, where the medical records reflect his admission at about 8:30 PM with multiple injuries and disorientation. He was thereafter referred to Dr. Sushila Tiwari Hospital, Haldwani, where he received further treatment. It is further contended that Applicant No. 2, Paras, remained in his company throughout.

6. The brother of Applicant No. 1 also lodged FIR No. 37/2023 against the bar owner and others at 00:29 AM on 28.06.2023, i.e., merely twelve minutes after the registration of FIR No. 36/2023. According to the Applicants, the impugned FIR is a motivated counterblast, instituted belatedly in collusion with the bar owners and certain police personnel.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

8. Learned counsel for the Applicants submits that the present FIR is a counterblast to FIR No. 37 of 2023 lodged against the bar workers. It is urged that Applicant No. 1 Devendra had sustained severe injuries in a quarrel at the bar around 7–8 PM and was admitted to CHC, Bhowali, 2 Criminal Misc. Application No. 80 of 2024------Devendra Mehra and another v. State of Uttarakhand & Another Ashish Naithani J. at about 8:30 PM, which rules out his presence at Kotwali, Bhowali, at the relevant time. The medical records from both CHC, Bhowali, and Dr. Sushila Tiwari Hospital, Haldwani, are stated to corroborate this version.

9. It is urged that the FIR lodged by the constable was filed after undue delay at 00:17 AM, just minutes prior to the registration of the Applicants’ FIR, thereby indicating mala fides. It is further submitted that the allegation that the injured persons could have assaulted a constable and caused damage to property within the premises of Kotwali is inherently improbable.

10. It is further contended that there are no independent witnesses, all cited witnesses being police colleagues of the complainant. No motive or mens rea has been shown, and continuation of proceedings would amount to an abuse of process.

11. Per Contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the application and submits that sufficient material exists against the Applicants. Statements of police witnesses and the medical report of the complainant support the case.

12. The learned State counsel relies on CCTV footage from Kotwali Bhowali, obtained and sealed under Section 65B Evidence Act, which allegedly shows the Applicants pushing police personnel and vandalising property.

13. It is argued that the plea of alibi and reliance upon medical records pertain to matters of defence which can only be tested during trial and not in proceedings under Section 482 CrPC. It is submitted that the cognizance and summoning order have been rightly passed on 3 Criminal Misc. Application No. 80 of 2024------Devendra Mehra and another v. State of Uttarakhand & Another Ashish Naithani J. the basis of the material available on record and do not warrant interference.

14. Having considered the rival submissions, this Court is mindful that the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC is to be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, either to prevent abuse of the process of law or to secure the ends of justice. Ordinarily, where disputed questions of fact and appreciation of evidence are involved, such matters are best left to be adjudicated upon in the course of trial.

15. However, in the present case, certain circumstances merit closer scrutiny. The medical records of CHC, Bhowali, unequivocally reflect that Applicant No. 1 Devendra was brought there with multiple lacerations and a head injury at about 8:30 PM on 27.06.2023, and the attending doctor recorded him as disoriented. This timing directly overlaps with the alleged assault on the complainant inside Kotwali, Bhowali. Prima facie, such a contemporaneous medical record furnishes strong material supporting the plea of alibi.

16. The FIR of the complainant was lodged only at 00:17 hours, after considerable delay, whereas FIR No. 37/2023 by the brother of Applicant No. 1 was lodged at 00:29 hours. The proximity of timing suggests that FIR No. 36/2023 was lodged as an afterthought to counter the Applicants’ version. The delay, particularly when the complainant was himself a police constable inside the police station, remains unexplained.

17. As regards the reliance placed by the State on the CCTV footage, this Court is of the view that the same cannot be accorded conclusive probative value at this stage. Its authenticity and the continuity of the chain of custody are yet to be established in accordance with the law, 4 Criminal Misc. Application No. 80 of 2024------Devendra Mehra and another v. State of Uttarakhand & Another Ashish Naithani J. which can only be tested in the course of a trial. Until such verification, no adverse inference can be drawn against the Applicants on the basis of such material.

18. Equally relevant is the fact that all witnesses to the alleged assault are police personnel of the same police station, with no independent witness cited. In such circumstances, when weighed against medical records establishing the presence of Applicant No. 1 elsewhere, serious doubt arises on the veracity of the prosecution case.

19. The Court also finds substance in the contention that it is highly improbable for a person suffering from severe injuries with bleeding lacerations to indulge in acts of vandalism within a police station simultaneously. It appears equally implausible that, having allegedly assaulted a police constable inside Kotwali, the accused could have departed unrestrained without being taken into custody.

20. Thus, the materials on record, even if taken at their face value, do not disclose the essential ingredients of the offences under Sections 332 and 353 IPC or the allied provisions insofar as Applicant No. 1 Devendra is concerned. Regarding Applicant No. 2 Paras, the only allegation is that he was accompanying Devendra, with no specific overt act independently attributed to him.

21. In the above circumstances, continuation of the proceedings against the Applicants would serve no fruitful purpose and would instead amount to harassment. The case, in its essence, appears to be a counterblast intended to dilute the effect of FIR No. 37/2023 lodged against the bar workers. The criminal process cannot be permitted to be misused as an instrument of retaliation. 5 Criminal Misc. Application No. 80 of 2024------Devendra Mehra and another v. State of Uttarakhand & Another Ashish Naithani J.

22. This Court is therefore satisfied that even if the allegations in FIR No. 36/2023 are taken at their face value, the same do not disclose a credible offence against the Applicants and that allowing prosecution to continue would amount to abuse of process. The present case falls squarely within the category where inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. deserve to be exercised. ORDER Accordingly, the Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed. The summoning order dated 11.10.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital in Criminal Case No. 5022 of 2023 “State vs. Devendra Mehra & others” and all proceedings arising from FIR No. 36 of 2023, P.S. Bhowali, District Nainital, under Sections 332, 353, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, are hereby quashed qua the present Applicants. It is clarified that this order shall not preclude investigation or trial in respect of FIR No. 37/2023 or any other independent proceedings. Ashish Naithani, J. Dated: 25.08.2025 NR/ NITESH RAWAT DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=bea38a9cb7bca67cc3988ad93d563d 95c70eb77fa0ea4758e401cf436bdce9fb, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=F691686B3C447434E89897BCD C0B6567DCE4B7108B324FFED3C8A159F3BDD 03C, cn=NITESH RAWAT 6 Criminal Misc. Application No. 80 of 2024------Devendra Mehra and another v. State of Uttarakhand & Another Ashish Naithani J.