Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 447 (UTT)

Tajmul Hak @ Bhura v. Dilshad

2024-07-02

RAKESH THAPLIYAL

body2024
JUDGMENT : Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. The instant C482 Application has been preferred by the applicant, challenging the order passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate/Ist Additional Civil Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 151 of 2023, Tajmul @ Bhura Vs. Dilshad @ Deeja and another dated 25.08.2023, as well as the order dated 30.11.2023 passed by the Court of Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Criminal Revision No. 160 of 2023. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the applicant, who is the resident of village Dheer Mazra of Tehsil Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar submitted a complaint on 30.04.2023 to the S.H.O of P.S. Bhagwanpur against the respondents with the allegations that the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 are threatening the applicant and his wife, as well to other family members to implicate them in false cases since his wife Smt. Nargis was elected as a Pradhan of village Dheer Mazra in the year 2022. It is submitted that the wife of Dilshad @ Deeja (respondent No. 1) was elected as Pradhan of the said village in the year 2011 and in the year 2012 they constructed the toilets of those families who are the BPL Card holders and under the garb of this, they embezzled the amount. 3. A further reference has been made in the complaint that the brother of the present applicant namely Shamshad lodged a First Information Report on 07.06.2013 at P.S. Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar which was registered as Case Crime No. 113 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 467, 468, 471 of IPC, which is pending in the Court concerned. 4. In the complaint, it is alleged that since the wife of the applicant has been elected as Pradhan in the year 2022, the respondents are threatening the applicant and his wife and family members to implicate them in false cases and pressuring to withdraw the proceeding which is pending in the Court, on the complaint of the brother of the present applicant. 5. 5. When no action was taken by the concerned Police Station, another complaint was made to the S.S.P. Haridwar on 06.05.2023 with the request to register the FIR against the respondents; however, no action was taken thereon and subsequently, the applicant preferred an Application under Section 156(3) of CrPC, which was registered as Miscellaneous Case No. 151 of 2023 on 09.05.2023 with same allegation as alleged in the complaint made to the S.H.O., Bhagwanpur and to the S.S.P. Haridwar on 30.04.2023 and 06.05.2023 respectively. 6. On the said application, the comments from the concerned police station were also called and after examining the said report, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Ist Additional Civil Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar, by order dated 25.08.2023 reject the application preferred by the present applicant under Section 153(3) of CrPC, observing therein that the dispute appears to be nothing but arising from the election and therefore no offence is made out as alleged. 7. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate/Ist Additional Civil Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar dated 25.08.2023, a Criminal Revision No. 160 of 2023 was preferred and the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar by order dated 30.11.2023 dismissed the Revision, by observing therein that no illegality has been found while rejecting the application preferred under Section 156(3) of CrPC. 8. Now, being aggrieved with the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate/Ist Additional Civil Judge, Roorkee dated 25.08.2023, whereby the application preferred by the present applicant under Section 156(3) of CrPC was rejected, as well as the order passed by the Revisional Court on 30.011.2023, rejecting the Revision, the present C482 Application has been moved. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that while rejecting the application preferred under Section 156(3) of CrPC, the Judicial Magistrate/Ist Additional Civil Judge, Roorkee has not applied its judicious mind and submits that since the complaint discloses the commission of cognizable offences and as such the FIR should be registered, but both the Courts below have not applied their mind and dismissed the application as well as the revision. 10. 10. This Court examined the allegation as alleged in the complaint as well as in the application preferred under Section 156(3) of CrPC and on close scrutiny of all the allegations it appears that since the wife of the applicant elected as Pradhan in the year 2022 and earlier to this election, the wife of Dilshad (respondent No. 1) was elected as Pradhan in the year 2011, which itself reveals that there is nothing but a political rivalry in between both of them. Furthermore, as it appears from the allegation as alleged, all the allegations are nothing but on an anticipation and this Court is of the opinion that with an ulterior purposes and motive the applicant preferred the application under Section 156(3) of CrPC and the trial Court rightly dismissed the application of the applicant preferred under Section 156(3) of CrPC. 11. This Court also examined the order passed by the Revisional Court and this Court is also of the view that the Revisional Court rightly dismissed the revision. 12. Accordingly, the present C482 Application is dismissed, being devoid of merit.