Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The instant revision has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 5.2.2010 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Churu in Complaint No. 576/2000 (310/2007) whereby the respondents No. 2 to 4 have been discharged from the offences under Sections 323, 342, 327, 354, 363, 368, 386 and 120B IPC. The said order has been affirmed by the Sessions Judge, Churu in revision vide order dated 10.3.2011.
(2.) SUCCINCTLY stated the facts of the case are that petitioner Chanda Devi filed a complaint on 6.7.1998 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Churu against the present respondents and one Mohan Lal, Circle Inspector with the allegation that on 15.6.1998, while she was at her house, 3 -4 police officers including Mohan Lal Circle Inspector and Hidayat Khan, A.S.I. in uniform came to her house. She alleged that she was forcibly boarded in a jeep and taken to an unknown place and was assaulted there. Thereafter she was brought to Kotwali, Churu. The accused No. 1 and 2 namely, Govind Narayan Sharma and Rampal Swami were present at the Kotwali. They slapped her and gave her foul abuses. Accused Govind Narayan gave her abuses and tried to extract information about the money which she had allegedly taken from Aamla Prasad. The complainant replied that she had not taken any money from Aamla Prasad. On this, Govind Narayan and Rampal Swami became enraged and told Mohan Lal to throw her down. Mohan Lal, C.I., allegedly stripped the complainant and Govind Narayan, Rampal Swami and Hidayat Khan started assaulting her with a wooden plank. She suffered serious injuries on her private parts also. She further alleged that when she did not confess regarding having taken money from Aamla Prasad, all the accused beat her so much that she became unconscious. When she regained consciousness in the afternoon, she was lying in a room and nearby two female constables were sitting. Her salwar was blood stained and she was bleeding from the wounds. In the evening, she was locked at an unknown place. She further alleged that on 16.6.1998, she was again taken to Kotwali and was beaten brutally. She further alleged that on 17.6.1998, her husband was also brought and they both were thrown on the lawn and were assaulted. The respondents forcibly tried to recover the money which was taken out from Malkhana by Aamla Prasad. The brutal acts of the accused continued till 20.6.1998. On 19.6.1998, Hidayat Khan and Amra Ram came and forcibly took their signatures on blank papers for the purpose of showing an agreement to sell the complainant's land to Hidayat Khan for a consideration of Rs. 95,000/ - as well as showing the sale of two buffaloes to Amra Ram at the rate of Rs. 10,000/ -. The complainant further alleged that Mohan Lal took a sum of Rs. 1,10,000/ - from Hidayat Khan and Amra Ram and then, she was again locked up. The complainant's children informed the other family members on which the complainant's brother in law Rati Ram came to Churu and filed a complaint in this regard to the Sessions Judge, Churu. On coming to know of this complaint, the complainant and her husband were taken to Dudwa Khara and were confined secretly in a room. Thereafter, under the impression that Sessions Judge, Churu would make inspection of Kotwali, the accused persons prepared false documents showing that the complainant and her husband were arrested on 20.6.1998 and then they were presented before the A.C.J.M., Ratangarh on 21.6.1998. The A.C.J.M., Ratangarh remanded the petitioner and her husband to police custody for three days. Thereafter, the complainant's son Subhash and Jeth (brother -in -law) Rati Ram filed a complaint with the Chief Minister, Home Minister, Human Rights Commission, D.I.G. Police Range, Bikaner, D.G.P., Jaipur and District Collector, Churu etc. but no action was taken on the same. On 24.6.1998, the complainant was presented in the Court of C.J.M., Churu and on that day, she allegedly exhibited her injuries as well as her blood stained salwar to the learned Magistrate. The complainant's lawyer filed an application for her medical examination on which the medical jurist examined the complainant and found the existence of number of injuries on the body of the complainant, but because of influence of the police, the injury report was not prepared. The complainant ultimately prayed that cognizance be taken against the accused and they be punished for their atrocities. Various documents including the medical report of the complainant were filed along with the complaint.
(3.) THE complaint was proceeded with under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. and ultimately, the learned Magistrate by order dated 18.10.2000 proceeded to take cognizance and summoned the accused for the aforesaid offences. The accused Hidayat Khan and Mohan Lal challenged the order issuing process by filing two different revisions and the revisional court i.e. the Additional Sessions Judge, Churu proceeded to reject the revision filed by Hidayat Khan by order dated 2.11.2002 but accepted the revision filed by accused Mohan Lal, C.I., by order dated 17.6.2003 giving him the benefit of Section 197 Cr.P.C. and the order issuing process against him was quashed.;