C482/1100/2012 of NITIN SHARMA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANR

C-482 Petition No. 1100 of 2012

U.C.Dhyani, J.

Mr. Prashant Khanna, Advocate, present for applicant.

Mr. Prem Kaushal, Brief Holder, present

for the State/respondent no.1.

None is present for the respondent no. 2, despite service of notice.

By means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant seeks to quash the charge-sheet dated 25.02.2012, order dated 21.06.2012 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1322/2012 State vs. Nitin Sharma, under Sections 323, 504, 384 and 385 of IPC, pending before learned Additional Judicial Magistrate, Rishikesh, District Dehradun.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued

that applicant sought some information under Right to Information Act but the same was not supplied, so he preferred an appeal before the competent officer of Garhwal University and it has also been adverted in direction issued by the Competent Officer to the Institute that specific and speaking information should be supplied to the applicant on question nos. 1 and 2, but instead of supplying these information, which may disclose irregularity and illegality including cheating done by Om Prakash Bhatt in the name of the Institute, he lodged the instant FIR against the applicant.

Since the respondent has not turned up

before this Court despite service of notice upon him, therefore, it appears that he is not interested in prosecuting the applicant.

There seems to be substance in the contention of learned counsel for the applicant that if criminal proceedings are allowed to be continued against present applicants, the same will amount to abuse of the process of the Court.

It will be futile exercise to keep petition under Section C-482 Cr.P.C. pending before this Court.

The Court can intervene in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent the abuse of process of law, as has been held by Hon’ble Apex Court in Rajiv Thapar and others vs. Madan Lal Kapoor (2013) 3 SCC 330, Amit Kapoor vs. Ramesh Chander and another, 2013 (1) SCC (Crl) 986 and Inder Mohan Gosami and another vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, (2008) 1 SCC (Crl) 259.

The petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

is allowed. As consequence thereof, charge-sheet dated 25.02.2012, order dated 21.06.2012 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1322/2012 State vs. Nitin Sharma, under Sections 323, 504, 384 and 385 of IPC, pending before learned Additional Judicial Magistrate, Rishikesh, District Dehradun, are hereby quashed.

Since present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is being decided in the absence of private respondent, therefore, liberty is granted to him to move for recall of this order, if he feels aggrieved with the same.

(U.C.Dhyani, J.)

20.06.2017

Kaushal