Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 249 (CHH)

RAMESH JAIN v. STATE OF C. G.

2003-12-17

FAKHRUDDIN

body2003
ORDER 1. The applicant has filed this petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR and the investigation made against him. It is not in dispute that report has been lodged against him by the Doctor on 10-5-2003, typed copy of which has been filed. The said report is pertinent and quoted herein below. 2. In para 10 of the petition, it is submitted that during investigation the investigating officer recorded the statements of the complainant Dr. Anupabhama Dixit, her husband Anurag Dixit, S. Salim Ahmed, Constable Purushottam Lal Sahu. In para 12, petitioner alleged that the FIR lodged by the complainant is illegal, untrustworthy, false and baseless because the statements of independent witnesses have not been recorded by the police and due to the contempt petition filed by the petitioner against the Town Inspector of the Police Station Moudhapara. As such it is submitted that the FIR is illegal, false and baseless. Learned counsel for the petitioner was specifically asked that when a lady makes a report or complaint to the police and thereon the police recorded the statements of the complainant, her husband and one another witness, how can it be termed as illegal. Learned counsel submits that the complainant, other independent witnesses are yet to be examined, as such the FIR is illegal, baseless and untrustworthy. Counsel for the petitioner is not able to say anything in support of the allegations of untrustworthy, baseless and falsity. On being asked as to who were the independent witnesses, counsel for the applicant is unable to give the names of those persons. 3. The petitioner in para 13 submitted that the complainant in her report has simply stated that the accused insulted her modesty, passed blue comments upon her and it is very strange that a reputed person would make a cheaper act. It is further submitted that with respect to treating and causing insult to the modesty of the complainant and passing blue comments on her, the Investigating Agency has not recorded statements of any independent witnesses who are living and residing nearby the place of incident. Petitioner further submits that the Investigating Agency has failed to collect the documentary or oral evidence against the petitioner. Petitioner further submits that the Investigating Agency has failed to collect the documentary or oral evidence against the petitioner. Another ground which has been urged in the petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. is that a police control room should be provided at all district and State Headquarters where information regarding the arrest and the place of custody of the arrestee shall be communicated by the officer causing the arrest within 12 hours of effecting the arrest and at the police control room and it should be displayed on a conspicuous notice board. 4. Prima facie the first information report goes to show the pathetic condition of the women. We are living in a Society, which has respect for the woman. Here the complainant is a lady doctor and serving in a Hospital. She is a responsible member of the Society. If a lady doctor is harassed as has been stated and if it is at all true, it is really unfortunate and shameful. The report shows that this applicant was chasing and harassing her and passing abusive comments on her. He used to phone her and was threatening her and even he dared to enter into the room of the hospital forcibly while she was discharging her duties. Now these acts are such which if found true go to show the extent to which a person has gone. This court had initially made it clear to the learned counsel that the trial is to take place and it may not be appropriate to press at this stage, but learned counsel insisted. Nothing has been shown as to why the lady who is a doctor would make a false accusation, that too against this applicant. In any case all these contentions have to be gone into by the trial Court and the applicant will have opportunity to advance his arguments whatever he has during trial. 5. Inspite of being repeatedly asked, counsel is not able to show the ground on which the report is said to be false. In the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this court, no case is made out warranting interference in this petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. One thing is borne out that even in the hospital where the doctors are working, the miscreant made the life miserable. The lady doctors deserve protection. In the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this court, no case is made out warranting interference in this petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. One thing is borne out that even in the hospital where the doctors are working, the miscreant made the life miserable. The lady doctors deserve protection. The State should give due protection and make all efforts to see that thy persons especially ladies should not feel unsafe. Every step be taken to see that such incidents do not take place. 6. The petitioner, however, alleged that the investigating agency failed to collect the documentary or oral evidence against the petitioner and challan has been filed in hot haste. If that be so, he may submit the material or evidence which he wants to be relied upon in his defence before the Trial Court in accordance with law. 7. It is submitted that the petitioner is a businessman and the trial will take a long time, and prays for a direction for early disposal of the trial. It is a case, which should be decided as early as possible preferably within 3 months. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case ends of justice will be served if a direction is given for early disposal of the trial. The State through its officers would see that the state is represented on all dates of hearing and the witnesses are present. The learned Magistrate shall also ensure that the summons etc. are served and the trial is complete as early as possible within 3 months. 8. Before parting, this Court would make' it clear that the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law. This petition fails and is dismissed with the direction aforesaid. Petition Dismissed.