Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 47 (MP)

Brijmohan Bhasin v. Anupam Kumar Verma

2002-01-10

NARAIN SINGH AZAD

body2002
ORDER Narain Singh 'Azad', J. 1. Shri P. R. Bhave appears for the petitioner. He is heard. 2. By the order dated 13th April, 2000, issued by the Ministry of Public Health and Family Welfare, Government of Madhya Pradesh, which is marked as Document A, this petitioner stood transferred from Sidhi to Chhindwara and the non-applicant stood transferred from Dewas to Ujjain. Thereafter, by another order dated 9th June, 2000, which is marked as Document D, the aforesaid Ministry transferred this petitioner from Sidhi to Chhindwara, by modifying the earlier order dated 13-4-2000, subject to this condition that in case the officers have already taken charge in compliance to order dated 13-4-2000, the subsequent order dated 9th June, 2000, will not come into force. Then the petitioner informed the Principal Secretary, Public Health and Family Welfare by letter dated 5th October 2000, in respect of non-co-operation and absence of respondent and thereby precluding the petitioner from taking the charge at Chhindwara in compliance to order dated 9th June, 2000. In this letter dated 5th October, 2000, it is found stated on behalf of this petitioner that by playing a deception, the respondent did obtain the charge at Chhindwara on 18th August, 2000. 3. Treating it to be a case of defamation, the respondent filed a complaint against this petitioner for an offence punishable under section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, marked as Document H. After recording the statements of the respondent and one witness A. K. Alvi, the learned C.J.M., Chhindwara, took cognizance of offence punishable under section 500 of the Indian Penal Code against this petitioner which persuaded him to approach this Court. 4. It is submitted by Shri Bhave that no offence punishable under section 500 of the Indian Penal Code may be taken to have been prima facie proved on the basis of the aforesaid letter dated 5th October, 2000, written by this petitioner and therefore the proceeding of Criminal Case No. 3128/2001, pending in the Court of C.J.M. Chhindwara against this petitioner, may be quashed. It is also submitted by Shri Bhave that respondent is 57 years old, who would be retiring in the next year and this petitioner is also 54 years of age therefore, in case the proceedings are not quashed, these two doctors would unnecessarily face the hardship of attending the Court. 5. It is also submitted by Shri Bhave that respondent is 57 years old, who would be retiring in the next year and this petitioner is also 54 years of age therefore, in case the proceedings are not quashed, these two doctors would unnecessarily face the hardship of attending the Court. 5. The last submission made by Sri Bhave on behalf of this petitioner may be considered even by the Court of C.J.M., if this petitioner makes his appearance in compliance to the process issued by the Court. Similarly, the absence of prima facie case for taking cognizance of offence punishable under section 500 of the Indian Penal Code may again be agitated before the learned C.J.M. 6. In the aforesaid circumstances and the availability of alternative and effective remedy to the petitioner, it is not found to be a case for exercise of inherent powers and hence this petition does not merit, which is accordingly disallowed and rejected.