High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 65 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34575 of 2022 Applicant :- Santosh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Through Secretary Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abha Pandey,Nagendra Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Learned AGA for the State has filed counter affidavit toady in Court, which is taken on record.
Legal Reasoning
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the records. The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the Charge Sheet No. 01 of 2021 dated 01.11.2021 as well as entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 429 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506 & 325 IPC, Police Station Tarya Sujan, District Kushinagar, pending in the court of C.J.M., Kushinagar. Brief facts giving rise to this application are that one Anil Yadav had lodged a NCR at Police Station Tarya Sujan, District Kushinagar registered vide NCR No.227 of 2016 in respct of an incident alleging therein that on 28.10.2016 at about 02.00 p.m., the stray goats of Santosh had entered in his field and started destroying his cauliflower crops. On raising protest against the aforesaid illegal act, Santosh along with applicant no. 2 armed with lathi and danda, reached there and started assaulting the first informant by lathi and danda. It is further alleged that on raising alarm, number of persons reached there and rescued Anil Yadav. On account of assault made by the applicants, Anil Yadav suffered serious injuries and thereafter, he visited the Community Health Centre, District Kushinagar on 28.10.2016 and got his injuries examined, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure CA-1 to the counter affidavit filed today. After examination of injuries of Anil Yadav, he was referred to Combined District Hospital, Kushinagar on 28.10.2016 for supplementary examination of his injuries. As per the supplementary injury report, the victim suffered a fracture of metatarsal bone and on the basis of the said injury report, a cognizable offence was registered against the applicants vide Case Crime No. 429 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506 & 325 IPC at Police Station Tarya Sujan, District Kushinagar. On the basis of the said FIR, the Investigating Officer thoroughly investigated the matter and after collecting cogent material in the form of statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., including that of the injured witnesses, submitted the charge-sheet against the applicants vide Charge-Sheet no.1 of 2021. On the basis of the said charge-sheet, learned Magistrate has taken cognizance vide order dated 02.05.2022 and summoned the applicants to face trial. Being aggrieved by the said order, present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed. The only submission made by learned counsel for the applicants is based on the injury report of the victim Anil Yadav. Relying on the said injury report, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that in the third line of the injury report, date of medical examination has been mentioned as 27.10.2016, whereas the incident is said to have taken place on 28.10.2016, as such, said injury report cannot be read in evidence and the entire prosecution story is liable to be quashed. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the said prayer and has drawn the attention of the Court to the complete copy of the injury report and has submitted that at the end of the injury report, where the Medical Officer has signed the injury report, specific date 28.10.2016 has been mentioned, which clearly indicates that, in fact, the injured was examined on 28.10.2016, however inadvertently, as a clerical mistake, in the third line of the injury report, date of medical examination has been mentioned as 27.10.2016, which is nothing but a clerical mistake as evident from reading of the complete injury report as well as the supplementary injury report. Moreover, the date 27.10.2016 mentioned in the injury report is merely an inadvertent mistake and the correct date is 28.10.2016, which even is corroborated by the statement of the injured witness recorded during the course of investigation, wherein he has categorically stated that the incident has taken place on 28.10.2016 on which date he was assaulted by applicants causing him a fracture injury, therefore, the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants that the injuries have been examined on 27.10.2016 is not corroborated from the corresponding documents and thus, is liable to be turned down. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the entire material on record, it is evident that the incident, in question, has taken place on 28.10.2016, in which, on account of assault made by the applicants, victim Anil Yadav has suffered serious injuries and was medically examined on 28.10.2016. As per the injury report as well as the supplementary injury report, the victim has suffered a fracture of metatarsal bone. From the careful perusal of the injury report, it is evident that, in fact, the victim was examined on 28.10.2016 as evident from the date mentioned at the end of the injury report, where the Medical Officer has appended his signature, however inadvertently, in the third line of the injury report, the date has wrongly been mentioned as 27.10.2016, which is nothing but an inadvertent mistake and cannot be questioned at this stage, when evidence is yet to come. The incident of causing injury has taken place on 28.10.2016, therefore, the examination of injuries on 27.10.2016 is not possible. However, on account of said inadvertent mistake, the entire proceedings cannot be quashed, which finds support from the allegations made in the FIR as well as the statements of the witnesses recorded during the course of investigation, which completely corroborates the prosecution story and constitute offence under Sections 325, 504, 506 & 323 IPC, for which, cognizance has been taken and the applicants have been summoned to face trial.
Decision
In view of the above, the entire proceedings based on the charge-sheet as well as the summoning order cannot be quashed, which is just proper and legal and do not call for any interference at this stage, when the evidence is yet to come. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 30.1.2023/Subham Digitally signed by :- SUBHAM KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad