- (1.) By means of this application, under Section 482 Cr.P.C. applicant has prayed for quashing of the criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4635/9 of 2006 (Ravish Kumar Vs Narendra Singh) under Sections 504 and 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Muzaffar Nagar pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar.
(2.) Facts giving rise to present petition are that a complaint was filed before the Magistrate purported to be under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the applicant, whereupon, learned Magistrate called for a report from the concerned police station and considering the report of the police ordered for registration and investigation of the case vide order dated 18.1.2005 and in pursuance thereof a Criminal Case being N.C.R. No. 12 of 2005, under Sections 504, 506 IPC was registered against the applicant. After recording the statement of the witnesses as well as collecting the entire evidence, Investigating Officer submitted final report to the Magistrate. Aggrieved with the aforesaid final report, opposite party no. 2 filed a protest petition in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate and the learned Magistrate ignoring the conclusion of the investigation undertaken by the Investigating Officer proceeded to summon the applicant for the offences under Sections 504, 506 IPC vide order date 18.4.2006. It is this order which has been questioned before this court in the present application.
(3.) Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that after investigation in the matter was conducted by the Investigating Officer, who has recorded the statement of the witnesses and concluded that the present prosecution against the applicant was malicious and the very foundation of the factual ingredients constituting substantive offence were missing, learned Magistrate issued process against the applicant by relying upon the statement of the complainant and their witnesses ignoring the statement of other witnesses who had clearly stated that no offence was committed by the applicant before Investigating Officer. Assuming that there was material to proceed the Magistrate was required to treat the N.C.R. as complaint and the Investigating Officer of the case as complainant in view of section 2(d) of the Cr.P.C. before issuing process.;