JUDGEMENT
SUVRA GHOSH,J. -
(1.)The petitioners have sought quashing of proceedings of G.R. Case no. 427 of 2024 pending before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Sealdah, South (24) Parganas.
(2.)Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the FIR was lodged by the private opposite party in his personal capacity though he has used
his official seal in the complaint which is not permissible. Though charge
sheet has been submitted against the petitioners under Sec. 341/332/353/323/324/427/114 of the Indian Penal Code read with sec. 3 of The PDPP Act, the seizure list witnesses have not been made
witnesses in the charge sheet. The witnesses examined under sec. 161
of the Code of Criminal Procedure in course of investigation are employees
of the private opposite party and have supported his cause for obvious
reasons. The injury reports do not make out an offence under sec. 323324 of the Indian Penal Code. No specific overt act has been attributed to each of the petitioners. False and frivolous allegations have
been thrust upon the petitioners only to wreck vengeance against them as
a counterblast to the complaint lodged by the petitioners against the
private opposite party and others. Petitioners no. 1 to 4 were granted bail
by the learned Trial Court with an observation that the
complainantprivate opposite party cannot be termed as a public servant
in terms of sec. 21 of the Indian Penal Code. Over and above all, the
charge sheet does not reflect the crime committed by each accused and
what is the material evidence available in the file.
(3.)Learned counsel has placed reliance in the authorities in Sharif Ahmed and Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another reported in 2024
Supreme Court Cases OnLine SC 726 and Mahmood Ali and Others vs.
State of Uttar Pradesh and Others reported in 2023 INSC 684 in support
of his contention.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.