- (1.) Y. R. Tripathi, J. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Basant Lal, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and the AGA.
(2.) THIS petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'code') has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet filed in case crime No. 403 of 1999, under Sections 323, 504 & 506 I. P. C. , relating to the police station Chock, District Lucknow and pending in the Court of I ACJM, Lucknow. It appears that opposite party No. 2, a practicing lawyer at Lucknow, approached the petitioner, who runs a gas agency in chowk, for change of name of gas connection No. 2168 from that of her deceased father to her mother. The petitioner informed the opposite party No. 2 that she should approach the proper authority in this connection. Further, it is said that the petitioner demanded some illegal gratification for doing the work and when the opposite party No. 2 refused to oblige him, the petitioner fell upon opposite party No. 2 and her brother, who at that time was accompanying the opposite party No. 2, and beat both of them. The incident is said to have been witnessed by Sri Suresh Pandey and Sri S. N. Vajpayee. The opposite party No. 2 lodged an F. I. R. of the incident and her brother, who allegedly had received injuries in the incident, got himself medically examined. The police of P. S. Chowk, after the investigation, presented a charge-sheet against the petitioner under Sections 323, 504 and 506 I. P. C. The petitioner disputing the authenticity of allegations made in the F. I. R. and the evidence collected during the course of investigation, as challenged the propriety of filing of the charge-sheet by the police and the learned counsel for the petitioner in the aforesaid perspective prays for quashing of the same. The opposite party No. 2, on the other hand, has filed the counter-affidavit, justifying the finding of the charge-sheet. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also gone through the materials on record.
(3.) IT is not disputed that the police after due investigation has filed charge-sheet on the basis of evidence collected by it. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the opposite party No. 2 is involved in number of litigations and she with her certain colleagues often prevents the petitioner from attending the Court proceedings of the case. This may be a ground for transfer of the case from district Lucknow to another place, but certainly is not a ground for quashing of the charge-sheet which has been submitted on the basis of evidence collected during the course of investigation. The truthfulness of the prosecution version is a matter, which can be examined only during the course of trial and at this stage, it cannot be held to be baseless and absurd. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a case for quashing of the charge- sheet and the petition is, therefore, dismissed.;