Decided on February 28,2020

Vinod Bhat Appellant


Sanjay Kumar Gupta,J. - (1.)From bare perusal of various interim orders, it transpires that no one has been appearing on behalf of petitioners since 29.04.2013. Since the instant case pertains to the year 2008, the same was taken on board. With the assistance of learned counsel representing respondents and going through the file, the instant case was finally heard.
(2.)The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing the order dated 24.09.2008 by virtue of which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu has returned the challan to the Investigating Officer/Agency for re-verification of various dates mentioned in the challan and also for further investigation.
(3.)The impugned order has been challenged on various grounds. It has been stated in the petition that instead of discharging the accused/petitioners, the learned trial court returned the challan for further investigation and for re-verification of the dates. The impugned order passed by the trial court reads as under:
'While perusing the file it has been found that the dates of various events have not only be jumbled but have also been recorded wrongly in the charge sheet as well as in the statement under section 161 Cr.P.C i.e., the date of marriage has been recorded in the charge sheet as 27th of April, 2007 and the various events of cruelty are described of the year 2004, 2005 and 2006. The complainant has clearly mentioned the date of marriage as 27th of April 2K. Even the contents of the application have been repeated on full two pages. Similarly, the statement of the complainant recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C mentions the date of payment of Rs. 70,000/- as 18th of August 2007 whereas, it is mentioned as 18th of August 2006 in the complaint.

It all reflects that the statements of the witnesses and the charge sheet have been written casually without applying mind properly. All these short comings must have been noted by the officer (SP North) through whom the charge sheet was submitted. Therefore, this file is ordered to be returned for further investigation and re- verification of the dates, which shall be done within a fortnight.

It would be pertinent to mention here as observed generally the charge sheets are neither indexed nor numbered. Even the age of the accused persons is also not mentioned which is in clear contravention of the circulars issued by the Hon'ble High Court. Besides, a lot of inconvenience is caused by conducting the trial. Even the paper used for writing various memos and statements is not of uniform size and quality. The non-mentioning of the age of the accused adds to the burden of court particularly when an accused claims to be a juvenile or senior citizen. Let a copy of this order be therefore forwarded to SSP Jammu for his information and to ensure that henceforth the needful is done.'

Let the index be prepared for information.

24.9.2008 Sd/-

CJM Jammu'


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