-r HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^PPLICANT NON-APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. Cr.M.P. No. 467/2009 Pratap Siagh Dhaliwal S/o Shri Bahadur Siagh Dhaliwal, aged about 57 years, Occupation-Goveniment Service, Home Dpartment, Dhar (M.P,), 2. RajendraSiagh Chaddha S/o late Shri Guruditya Siagh Chaddha, agcd about 70 years, R/o Naaak Niwas, Dharaiupura, Road, Jagdalpur, Distdct- Bastar(C.G.). State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Jagdalpiir Bastar, District Bastar(C.G.). PBTITION UNDBR SBCTION 482 OF THB CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCBDURB. (SB :Hon»bleBfe. T.P.Sliarma, J.) Present:- Shri Saurabh Dangi, Advocate for the applicant/petitioner. Shri Sanjeev Kumai' Agrawal, P.L. for the State/respondent N0. 2. ORAL- ORDBR (Passedon 04/09/2009) 1. This petition is under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the Code) for quashment of the order taking cognizance dated 7/3/2008 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate^ Jagdalpur, in criminal complaint case No. 278/08 and order dated 28/4/2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jagdalpur District Bastar in criminal revision No. 07/09 whereby leamed Chief Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 506 part-II of the Indian Penal Code against the present petitioner. 2. Quashment is prayed on the ground that without any prima facie material available on record leamed Chief Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence against the petitioner and continuance of such criminal proceeding before the Court would amount to abuse of the process of the Court. ~z- @ 7\ Leamed counsel for the petitioner argued that on the basis of complaint filed by the respondent court has enquired in to the matter in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XV of the Code and examined the complainant and witnesses complainant himself has deposed that some persons came to his house and they tried to break the grille they criminally intimidated him and platted stones and also told that he should immediate withdraw the case filed against the sister in law of petitioner, wife of petitioner and his brother in law. 8ome persons also used to threat by telephone from Indore. Leamed counsel for the petitioner further argued that if these allegation is admitted in its face value then the allegation may be sufficient for commission of persons who has threatened the complainant/respondent but not to the present petitioner. Order impugned^ copy of complaint, statement recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of the Code perused. Statement of the complainant recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of the Code reveals that some persons has criminally intimidated the respondent but present petitioner ha8 not criminally intimidated the petitioner therefore order taking cognizance on the basis of such statement is not sustainable against the petitioner. Consequently, order impugned and order taking cognizance by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jagdalpur is hereby set aside. However, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jagdalpur is directed to make fresh inquiry interims of Section 398 of the Code. Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code is stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge t