Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 785 (RAJ)

RATNA RAM v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

2018-03-16

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2018
JUDGMENT : Vijay Bishnoi, J. These criminal misc. petitions have been filed on behalf of the petitioners with a prayer for quashing FIR No. 9/2018 dated 21.1.2018 of Police Station Soorpaliya, Distt. Nagaur for the offences punishable under Section 306 IPC and Sections 3(1)(p) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015 against them. 2. The aforementioned FIR is lodged at the instance of complainant-respondent No. 2 with the allegation that his son Gena Ram, daughter-in-law Santosh, grand son Ganpat Singh and grand daughter Sumitra have committed suicide on 21.1.2018 on account of constant harassment by the petitioners - Ratna Ram, Radha Kishan and Bhanwaru Khan. 3. Pursuant to registration of the aforementioned FIR, the police have started investigation and the same is pending. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that there is no iota of evidence on record to suggest that the deceased persons namely Gena Ram, Ganpat Singh, Santosh and Sumitra committed suicide on account of harassment by the petitioners. It is contended that as a matter of fact, in the year 2012, petitioner Radha Kishan lodged a complaint with the Police Station Kotwali, Nagaur in relation to a theft committed in his house. It is further contended that deceased Gena Ram and petitioner Radha Kishan both were serving as Constable and Head Constable respectively in the police department in the year 2012 and were residing in the police quarters situated at police line, Nagaur. The quarters of Gena Ram and Radha Kishan were situated in front of each other. 5. The police in relation to the FIR lodged at the instance of petitioner Radha Kishan came to the conclusion that the theft in his house was committed by Ganpat Singh son of Gena Ram. It is contended that the investigation in the said theft case was conducted by as many as six police officials and out of which, five police officials have concluded that Ganpat Singh son of Gena Ram had committed the said theft in the house of Radha Kishan. However in the said case police have filed a negative final report in the court of concerned Magistrate. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that after one month and twenty two days of lodgement of the FIR NO. However in the said case police have filed a negative final report in the court of concerned Magistrate. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that after one month and twenty two days of lodgement of the FIR NO. 171/2012 by Radha Kishan, Ganpat Singh son of Gena Ram had also lodged an FIR with the allegation that Radha Kishan and other accused persons are harassing his family members and have also assaulted them. The said FIR is nothing but was a counter blast of the FIR lodged by Radha Kishan. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that in the said FIR lodged by Ganpat Singh, the police after thorough investigation have filed a negative final report while concluding that the allegations levelled by Ganpat Singh are false. 7. It is also submitted that in the FIR lodged by Radha Kishan in relation to the theft in his house, the police had filed a negative final report before the concerned Magistrate and when the same was pending an application was moved on behalf of the Investigating Agency to conduct further investigation in the matter before the concerned Magistrate and the concerned Magistrate had returned the case file to the Investigating Agency for that purpose. 8. At this stage, Ganpat Singh and Gena Ram have preferred S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 4243/2017 before this Court challenging the said FIR of theft bearing No. 171/2012 of Police Station Kotwali, Distt. Nagaur for the offences punishable under Sections 457 and 380 IPC filed on behalf of petitioner Radha Kishan. The said criminal misc. petition was ultimately dismissed by this Court on 8.1.2018 on the basis of the factual report submitted by the I.O. wherein, it is clearly mentioned that prima facie case against Ganpat Singh and Gena Ram is proved and recovery of stolen articles is to be carried out. 9. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that on account of dismissal of the said S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 4243/2017, Gena Ram and his family members were disturbed and on account of that only, they have committed suicide. It is also argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that from a bare perusal of the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR, no case for commission of any offence is made out against the petitioners. Petition No. 4243/2017, Gena Ram and his family members were disturbed and on account of that only, they have committed suicide. It is also argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that from a bare perusal of the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR, no case for commission of any offence is made out against the petitioners. It is further argued that the allegations made in the impugned FIR filed by the complainant-respondent No. 2 Khuma Ram in relation to the suicide committed by Gena Ram and his family members are so absurd that no prudent person can ever reach to a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the petitioners. 10. In support of the above contention, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan Lal & Ors. reported in 1992 SCC (Cri) 426. Learned counsel for the petitioners has, therefore, argued that the continuance of investigation into the impugned FIR is nothing but abuse of the process of law, therefore, the impugned FIR against the petitioners be quashed and all other proceedings in relation thereto be also quashed. 11. Per contra, Mr.P.R.Singh, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.B.L. Meena, I.G. (Law and Order) Rajasthan, Jaipur has submitted that the allegations contained in the impugned FIR do constitute a prima facie case against the petitioners and, therefore, no case for quashing of the impugned FIR is made out. 12. It is submitted by the I.O. that during the course of investigation, evidence of this effect has emerged that petitioner Radha Kishan by using his influence has got a false case registered against Gena Ram and his family members and the police officials, who conducted investigation into the case filed by Radha Kishan have conducted proper investigation and have falsely implicated Gena Ram and his family members. It is also submitted that investigation into the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR is under progress and the conclusion about involvement of the petitioners in the commission of crime will be drawn after completion of the investigation. 13. It is also submitted that investigation into the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR is under progress and the conclusion about involvement of the petitioners in the commission of crime will be drawn after completion of the investigation. 13. Learned counsel Mr.Manoj Bhandari appearing for the complainant Khuma Ram has submitted that the allegations contained in the impugned FIR do constitute a prima facie case against the petitioners, hence, no case for quashing of the impugned FIR is made out and the misc. petitions be dismissed. 14. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 15. In the impugned FIR, the complainant has alleged that on receiving information from his nephew Purkha Ram on 21.1.2018, when they assembled at the house of Gena Ram, they found Gena Ram, his wife Santosh, his daughter Sumitra and his son Ganpat Singh hanging from the ceiling through ropes and they found a suicide note of five pages written by Gena Ram on the spot, in which, it is written that the deceased persons are committing suicide on account of constant harassment by Radha Kishan and his persons. 16. This Court is of the opinion that the allegations contained in the impugned FIR do constitute a prima face case against Radha Kishan and others. 17. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is having no merit that the allegations made in the impugned FIR are absurd and on the basis of the said allegations, no prudent person can ever reach to a just conclusion that there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused. 18. The position of law is well settled in relation to the powers of the High Courts for quashing FIR lodged at any police station. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhajan Lal and Others (supra) has specifically held that the power of quashing criminal proceedings will be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rare of the rarest cases. It is also held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above referred judgment that where the allegations contained in the FIR constitute a prima facie case, the FIR cannot be quashed. 19. Later on, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rupan Deol Bajaj (Mrs) & Anr. v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill & Anr. reported in 1995 SCC (Cri) 1059 has reiterated the above principle. 20. 19. Later on, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rupan Deol Bajaj (Mrs) & Anr. v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill & Anr. reported in 1995 SCC (Cri) 1059 has reiterated the above principle. 20. As said earlier, this Court is convinced that the allegations contained in the impugned FIR do constitute a prima facie case hence, no case for quashing of the impugned FIR is made out. 21. Resultantly, these criminal misc. petitions are dismissed.