SUNDER LAL Vs. STATE AND ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
State And Another
Referred Judgements :-
BAJAJI APPAJI KOTE V. EMPEROR
STATE V. VIPRA KHIMJI GAN -GARAM
EMPEROR VS. JOHRI
Click here to view full judgement.
G. Kumar, J. -
(1.)THE applicant was convicted and sentenced Under Section 182 of the IPC to pay a fine of Rs. 60/ - and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 -1/2 months.
(2.)THE applicant had made a report Under Section 307 IPC against Deoki Nandan, Jagdish, Suraj Prasad and Govind Das at the P.S. Kot -wali, Orai, alleging that he had seen one Suraj Prasad son of Nathu coming with a gun and smoking Biris, whereupon the applicant had asked him not to smoke Biri while carrying a gun. Suraj Prasad is said to have disliked this remark with the result that there was exchange of hot words between them. Two other persons Deoki Nandan and Govind Das were alleged to have arrived and asked Jagdish to bring a smaller gun (i.e. revolver or pistol). He brought the same and fired one round from that gun towards the applicant, as a result whereof he fell down on the ground and the bullet whizzed him across. Thereafter the applicant took shelter in his aunt's house, but was surrounded by Deoki Nandan and others. On investigation, it was found that one Chintoley was blessed with a son and so Deoki Nandan and Suraj Prasad had gone there in order to celebrate the birth of a male child by firing the gun. While he was passing the house of the applicant, the latter raised an objection against smoking Biri. This resulted in exchange of hot words, but the matter ended then and there on the intervention of the villagers. It was further found on investigation that the allegation of the applicant that shots were fired to kill him was baseless and false. So, instead of submitting a chargesheet against the persons complained of Under Section 307 IPC the Inspector Incharge Kotwali submitted a final report to the Magistrate and chargesheeted the applicant Under Section 182 IPC.
The applicant admitted having lodged a report in the Kotwali and re -iterated that the facts mentioned therein were correct.
(3.)THE learned Magistrate, on consideration of the entire evidence produced before him, held that the allegations of the applicant were fake and as such, the applicant was tried summarily and convicted and sentenced as stated at the outset.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.