Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 235 (UTT)

RAJESH KUMAR SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2017-04-12

U.C.DHYANI

body2017
JUDGMENT U.C. Dhyani, J.(Oral) By means of present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks to set aside / quash the criminal proceeding in criminal case no. 3403 of 2011, under Section 134 of the Representation of the People Act, State vs Tapo Vardhan Varma and others, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar. 2. When, in the year 2008, the elections of Local Bodies were held, the petitioner during the relevant period was posted as Asstt. Teacher (Science) in Government High School, Turka Gaurim Kichha, Udham Singh Nagar. The District Election Officer appointed the petitioner as Polling Officer under intimation to the Principal of said High school. The petitioner was already on leave due to sudden demise of his father. Petitioner was in his native village in Balia (U.P.) when the Principal of the school gave information to him about election duty on 10.04.2008 over telephone. 3. On account of above mentioned unavoidable circumstances and compelling reason, petitioner was not in a position to join the first training, which was scheduled on 11.04.2008 and all the facts and circumstances for non-appearance was conveyed to concerned officer orally by Principal on 11.04.2008. Even then, an FIR was lodged against the petitioner on 13.04.2008, under Section 134 of the Representation of the People Act. 4. Petitioner was not aware about the lodging of the FIR and on 15.04.2008, he moved a letter to District Election Officer, Udham Singh Nagar to seek permission for discharging his duty as Polling Officer. 5. Petitioner was authorized to discharge his duty as Polling Officer and accordingly he joined his duty as Polling Officer at Primary School, Jaspur Khurd, Kashipur and discharged his duties to the satisfaction of his authorities. 6. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that there was default of the petitioner on single day and, thereafter he attended the training programme. He also participated in the election process as Polling Officer. The absence was inadvertent, inasmuch as the petitioner was on leave due to sudden demise of his father. 7. Although jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution, but this is one such case, in which inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised. The absence was inadvertent, inasmuch as the petitioner was on leave due to sudden demise of his father. 7. Although jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution, but this is one such case, in which inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised. The power is to be exercised ex debito justitiae, i.e., to do real and substantial justice for administration of which alone, the courts exists. 8. Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is, therefore, allowed. Criminal proceeding in criminal case no. 3403 of 2011, under Section 134 of the Representation of the People Act, State vs Tapo Vardhan Varma and others, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar are hereby quashed qua petitioner only.