TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 1080X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... law. Further, it is well settled that the trial court while considering the discharge application is not to act as a mere post office. The Court has to sift through the evidence in order to find out whether there are sufficient grounds to try the suspect. The court has to consider the broad probabilities, total effect of evidence and documents produced and the basic infirmities appearing in the case and so on. The High Court has committed jurisdictional error by not entertaining the revision petition on merits and overlooking the fact that 'discharge' is a valuable right provided to the Accused. In line with the fact that the High Court and the court below have not examined the fairness of criminal investigation in this case and other related aspects concerning improvement of witness statements, it is necessary for the High Court to reconsider the entire matter and decide the revision petition afresh. The case remanded back to the High Court for its reconsideration in accordance with law - appeal disposed off by way of remand. - HON'BLE JUDGES N.V. RAMANA C.J.I., SURYA KANT AND ANIRUDDHA BOSE JJ For the Appellant : Shantanu Sagar, AOR For the Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concerns shall be kept back in your hands. I will shot [sic.] such number of bullets that even your face could not be recognized. Mohd. Sharif Kahn and Umesh Kumar Bhatt had also heard the threatening given by Sanjay Rai. It is apparent that there is material change in the statement of the Respondent - complainant wherein he introduced Mohd. Sharif Khan and Umesh Kumar Bhatt as witnesses for the call made by the Appellant herein. 6. In any case, on 21.07.2012 a charge sheet came to be filed against the Appellant/Accused Under Sections 504 and 506 Indian Penal Code based on the statement of complainant and the affidavits of two witnesses. It may not be out of context to mention here that the Investigating Officer did not deem it necessary to take the version of the Appellant on record or consider his side of story also. 7. The CJM took cognizance of the matter on 08.11.2012. However, well before for framing of the charges the Appellant sought his discharge Under Section 239 Code of Criminal Procedure contending that the complainant has falsely implicated him and the allegation of telephonic threats does not constitute an offence Under Sections 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y overlooked the credentials of the complainant who is involved in seven criminal cases including Under Sections 323, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code. A letter from the Resident Editor of 'The Pioneer' was also produced, showing that the complainant was not employed with their newspaper around the time of the alleged incident. 11. On the other hand, learned State Counsel urged that the allegations make for a clear case Under Sections 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and that no error was committed by the High Court or the CJM. In addition to the judgment of this Court which the High Court relied upon, he buttressed his submissions citing State of Karnataka v. M.R. Hiremath (2019) 7 SCC 515 which held that the Court ought not to enter into questions of evidentiary value of the material adduced at the stage of considering discharge, and Srilekha Sentilkumar v. CBI (2019) 7 SCC 82 whereby this Court opined that it was impermissible to look into the merits of the case while exercising powers Under Section 239 Code of Criminal Procedure. ANALYSIS: 12. At the outset, we may note that the High Court has dismissed the Criminal Revision on the ground of lack of jurisdict ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on be interfered with Under Section 397(2) Code of Criminal Procedure or 482 Code of Criminal Procedure or Article 227 of the Constitution which is a constitutional provision but the power of the High Court to interfere with an order framing charge and to grant stay is to be exercised only in a exceptional situation. (emphasis supplied) 14. In Madhu Limaye (supra), this Court authoritatively held: 9... Sometimes the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court has also been resorted to for the same kind of relief by challenging the order taking cognizance or issuing processes or framing charge on the grounds that the Court had no jurisdiction to take cognizance and proceed with the trial, that the issuance of process was wholly illegal or void, or that no charge could be framed as no offence was made out on the allegations made or the evidence adduced in Court.. 10. ... Even assuming, although we shall presently show that it is not so, that in such a case an order of the Court taking cognizance or issuing processes is an interlocutory order, does it stand to reason to say that inherent power of the High Court cannot be exercises for stopping the criminal proceeding as e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
