IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 546 of 2007 Krishan Pal Sharma. ………. Applicant. Versus State of Uttarakhand and another. …....…. Respondents Present : Mrs. Prabha Noliyal, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. P.S. Bohara, Brief Holder for the State. Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. 1. By way of this petition, the prayer has been made to quash the proceedings of criminal case no. 1007 of 2006 pertaining to crime no. 426 of 2006 Police Station Rishikesh, which is based on the chargesheet submitted against petitioner (Krishan Pal Sharma) under section 452, 323, 352, 504, 506 IPC. The said trial has been stayed to be proceeded by this Court on dated 07.08.2007. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it transpires that Ishwar Das Kalra (complainant) founded “Narain Seva Ashram” under the title of Shrimati Rajdevi Lalchand Kalra Dharmarth Trust way back in 1983. The building of this Ashram exists at Haridwar Road, Rishikesh. Ever since its inception, almost 24 years ago from the lodging of FIR, one Krishan Pal Sharma (correspondent of local newspaper) was allowed to be a tenant in the first floor of the building along with other tenants. Eventually, the significance of the building and occupation therein skyrocketed, so in the changed scenario Ishwar Das Kalra, who was looking after the building as landlord, exerted pressure upon Krishan Pal Sharma for vacation of the premises occupied by him. Since 2 Krishan Pal Sharma was affiliated to print media, hence, being an influential person, he thwarted the consistent pressure of Ishwar Das Kalra. However, to harmonize the issue an agreement was executed on stamp paper of Rs. 100/- between Ishwar Das Kalra and Krishan Pal Sharma wherein Ishwar Das Kalra admitted that Krishan Pal Sharma is his tenant for last 24 years and Krishan Pal Sharma was ready to pay rent of the premises at the rate of Rs. 2100 per month. Krishan Pal Sharma paid Rs. 2100 toward the rent of one month, running from 01.10.2006 to 31.10.2006. Receipt whereof is Annexure no. 2 of the affidavit filed along with this petition. 3. It appears that somehow or the other quarrel again started between the two. It is alleged that in intervening night of 5th /6th October 2006 at about 10.00 p.m. Krishan Pal Sharma entered in the room of Ishwar Das Kalra, hurled abuses and threatened him that if henceforth, he has asked to vacate the premises then he will kill him (Ishwar Das Kalra). It has also alleged that Krishan Pal Sharma was bent upon for physical assault, putting him persistent threat. When Ishwar Das Kalra raised alarm then the neighbouring tenants Jagat Narayan Mishra and others came at the spot. Feeling the presence of the neighbouring persons, Krishan Pal Sharma took to his heels. So FIR was lodged in the next morning i.e. on 06.10.2006 at 09.40 a.m. with no medical report. 4. Apprehended of nabbing, Krishan Pal Sharma filed writ petition no. 1322 (MB) of 2006 in this Court and got his arrest stayed therein. When that petition was pending, on one date fixed for hearing, Sri D.K. Sharma, learned Government Advocate (as he then was) apprised the Court that police have submitted final report in the matter. So on this statement 3 rendered by learned Government Advocate that time, writ petition was dismissed by this Court treating as infructuous. 5. In fact, the position was otherwise. Police submitted chargesheet on 04.11.2006 instead of final report, so the learned Magistrate took cognizance in the matter on 08.11.2006. In this petition, submission of chargesheet and order of cognizance, as stated above, are under challenge. 6. Mrs. Prabha Noliyal, learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently argued before this Court that the matter between Ishwar Das Kalra and Krishan Pal Sharma has arisen out of a civil dispute between landlord and tenant. She apprised this Court that civil litigation is also pending in the court of competent jurisdiction, launched by Ishwar Das Kalra against Krishan Pal Sharma for vacation of building and by filing this FIR his sole motive is to mount pressure upon Krishan Pal Sharma to achieve success, what has been sought by filing civil litigation. The other witness Jagat Narayan Mishra is also tenant of Ishwar Das Kalra, so he has extended favour towards his landlord Ishwar Das Kalra and has, thus, given statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. against Krishan Pal Sharma. Had there been any truth in the factum of FIR other independent witnesses would have been examined by Investigating Officer. It is needless to say that in the FIR Ishwar Das Kalra stated presence of other neighbours but no such neighbour has been made witness to support the basis of submission of the chargesheet. 7. Although the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that learned Government Advocate on dated 14.12.2006 apprised the Court regarding submission of the final report in the matter, is of no avail because that statement by 4 learned Government Advocate was certainly given under some misconception, consequently, no benefit of the same can be derived by the petitioner Krishan Pal Sharma from the same. However, the other contentions inter alia, as has been advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, are quite convincing and no one can be allowed to abuse the process of law machinery i.e. Investigating Agency and compelling his opponent to face rigmarole trial in the court. 8. In view of the above, this petition has merits and is allowed. Impugned chargesheet and order of cognizance dated 08.11.2006 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Rishikesh are hereby quashed. (Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) 14.10.2011 SKS