DIPAK SAHA RAY, J. - (1.) THE present case arises out of an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the criminal proceedings of GR case No 3369 of 2010 arising out of Pahargaon Police Station case No 320 of 2010 dated 26.11.2010 under section 354/323/504 of Indian Penal Code.
(2.) THE grievances of the petitioner may briefly be stated as follows:- The opposite party herein as defacto complainant lodged FIR with the Pahargaon Police Station alleging therein inter alia that the defecto complainant had been residing with her husband and children in the rented accommodation at Bhathubasthi under the land-lord Joginder Lall. She also used to run a clinic in the name and style 'Family Clinic' in her said rented room. On 26.11.2010 at around 10.30 hours when she was attending a patient, one Perminder Lall, the son of the land lord came to her clinic and asked her to vacate the room immediately. At that time he used slang language and slapped her on her cheek and outraged her modesty by pulling her hand. It is further alleged that at that time the land lord of that room i.e., the father of the accused was present at the spot. On the basis of such information Pahargaon Police Station case No 320 of 2010 dated 26.11.2010 under section 354/ 323/504 of the Indian Penal Code was started. Police took up investigation of the case and after completion of investigation submitted report in final form under section 504 of the Indian Penal Code. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that initially the case was registered under section 323/354/504 of the Indian Penal Code. But during investigation as no material in respect of offences under section 354/323 of the Indian Penal Code was found, report in final form in respect of section 504 of the Indian Penal Code was filed. It is further pointed out that at time of registration of the case before the Police, no ingredient of offence under section 504 of the Indian Penal Code was disclosed in the First Information Report. FIR only disclosed that the accused used slang language, but the said fact was not sufficient to constitute the offence punishable under section 504 of the Indian Penal Code and as such the proceedings of the concerned GR case is required to be quashed. It is further submitted that there is civil dispute between the parties and in order to harass the petitioner, the opposite party as defecto complainant initiated the said case falsely.
(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the State, on the other hand, has submitted that the investigating officer during investigation collected evidence and materials in support of the allegation of the petitioner and accordingly he has submitted Charge Sheet. It is further argued that the point for adjudication is weather mere use of slang language will constitute any offence publishable under section 504 of Indian Penal Code and this fact finding can only be made at the time of trial by taking evidence. In such circumstances, it is submitted, when a Prima facie case has been established against the present petitioner, the proceedings of the concerned GR case should not be quashed.;