R.K.GUPTA Vs. DALER SINGH
LAWS(HPH)-1991-8-10
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Decided on August 08,1991

R.K.GUPTA Appellant
VERSUS
DALER SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

DEVINDER GUPTA,J. - (1.) Petitioner has by filing this petition under section 481 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called as the Code) has sought quashing of an order passed on June 17, 1989 by Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi, allowing the respondents revision and thereby quashing an order passed on June 8, 1988 by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sundernagar.
(2.) The petitioner, who is a duly registered Medical Practitioner under the Himachal Pradesh Ayurvedic and Unani Medical Practitioners Act, 1968 was challaned for having committed an offence under the provisions of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sundernagar on the basis of a complaint preferred by respondent, a Drug Inspector. On April 8, 1988, the said complaint was stated to be fixed for recording the statement of accused -petitioner, it is the case of the petitioner that he used to appear in Court on every hearing but the case used to be adjourned for want of appearance of respondent and this happened more than 7 or 8 occasions. On April 8, 1988, learned Counsel for the petitioner requested the Court that due to the absence of respondent the case was frequently being adjourned thereby putting the petitioner to harassment. It is further the case of the petitioner that at that very moment, the respondent in order to lower the petitioner in the estimation of the persons present in Court room and others made derogatory remarks about him and stated that he was cot a Medical Practitioner but was a quack. On these allegations, the petitioner on the same day, that is April 8, 1988, presented a complaint before the same Presiding Officer stating that as the respondent has committed an offence, by uttering the aforementioned words, under section 499 I. P. C, punishable under section 500, I. P. C, therefore, he be tried and punished in accordance with law.
(3.) The Magistrate directed the complaint to come on May 2, a988, for preliminary evidence. On the said date he submitted the file to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mandi, who recorded the statement of the complainant on June 2, 1988 alongwith two other witnesses in support of the complaint and later on made over the file to Judicial Magistrate First Class (2), Mandi Complainant put in appearance aloogwith his Counsel before the said Presiding Officer and he on June 8, 1988, recorded the following order: - "Case received by assignment. It be checked and registered. I have gone through the preliminary evidence. There are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused persons under section 500, I. P. C. Accused person be summoned for 7 -7 -1988.........";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.