'•'-s •'?-"• IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR Cr. M.P .N0. Z7^ "-DF PETITIONER \v^..^.- S£K> ',<••' ^..". ...^- •::'%^ ^ RESPONDENT Vikrmaditya Panda alias Tiku S/o Shri Vinod Panda, aged about -24 years, R/o village- Gad-umariya, P.S. Thana Kotwali Police Chauki Jutemill, Raigarh Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) Vs State of Chhattisgarh through Thana In-charge City Kotwali, Raiagrh Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) APPLICATION UNDER_SECTION 482 OF THE CQDE QF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE w\ m &y 9 1t i% ? ^ f^ a>' ? 1* I !§i f^: ;i./II i Bll; VK Wf'W^::^ :y''^^.:^^'^ifft:'. '• :KSB8s'A:a| KWeWWi!S SsSSSSS ¥s!SSsffiSSS'S9 ^^^^^^^ -;r- ^»ai y 3. t^sarnett txnjos^ fbr Itoe pett^^ * cominttted fflegali^ in fi^amg t^iaa^es zmder Sastii^^^^^^ IP€^against^hepetiti0i^a&eve^ cfaai^sfaee(;natareofaBegatKmsandiia&»e(tfHij^^ be sustaineft ly tha complainant ai% tate^ <Ht13aeiTfe^^l^^ case ft»r e<amirissiiai of offifesnce urute* Sec&Hi 307 of ttae ff©is ( ma^ but. He fitffh^ s^^ fhat ^beTfl-aimi% of dhat^e^; e ^ docti^I^ ateo tieeir examtaeddun^^^^t^ ttiat itgi.tries sostaiiied ly (he •coinpteteaiit are oiEdy stopte- m; ; nature. Leari^ caninse^IOT the^pet^^ _ to ihe petatiiBier, tiiff dispute an^ ^ toetweenl^iwfft^andtherawasfl^Bghtto alsosustained iigury aad^ case fe coHuMssioncf o^Dce tttrier »£%^ of the IPC faas^ ^..-•.^.,;:,.: •:<::;n'.<;;.,.^ .^ . ' • •1 ••;.,,; complaJimHt^ H& sutonElits 1±i^M^^^^ matter, fl'aanfag of chaige imder Section 307 of (he 1^3 to uswara'aated, ffle^at and Ufilite to be m.terfereffwlth. '<• •' '•• ••' . -' • '." •• '•'•: '• .' •' • '.•': ••.'.''. •..''.'• •• .. . . "'. '• • ••.•'• ''•.-'.'•'.' '.•••' 4. Tbe submissions wfau^i have Ixseaxvia&efy leamed couasri fia- flie^ ; petitlona-toave be^ te^^ 1y ffals Qourt fixmi 11^ chai^ slieet jffited agafast (he pietittoner. In t^ sheet, ttere are aUegatioiis agalinst the petitKKier inade tiy titifi! i complaiilant, contamied in the Ii>IR"a also In tlie case (ilary statemente that ihe petftiMifir ttu-eateaed the GQmplamairt tlmt tf he does jiot teare, Iw wouM Idfi him^^a^ thereaft»r,tlie petttioner assau&ed Iite wtth (he Iielp of ctate and •^^s^ ;iBBI ...si'sff-.sf'a [^S^^S^^^-SS^T^-^'f^s^E^f i??^^®.^ lv ^--; '%_ •«:'3;»^ i--'^::'^r:'^(-yf~S^:^ ^aass tte eQmiflalnai^^susteanet^^^ ^iai^ sheet ateo ^mm Q^fii®^ ^sxaminationandcertainiigmTesIiasealsO^^^b^ the petitiQner is entttted be aeqiiitted on fhe basis of sacfa allegation/chaTges £U3dfbe cheBgps fi«med,isa matta- ofesiMCTice. It caimot be said that the entire allc^attons s(nd iQateriat pkused^^^ the chare sheest, tf imwed, no case &T iHTOceedfa^s e®stustthe petitloner^coauBsdssioo(tfo£B5iiGeunderSection307Qffhen^ madeout 5. At the ste^e of framing chai^e, fhe Gourt bas prtma fcicie to considerwhefUer fha* is suflB^raent ground forprocee<fcigan<lnot, whether material prodiiced are sufficient ftar conOTcting ttoe aecused. ^AfteT jwama Jncte case fer proceedmgs 1s m«dfe?(fert.; chaigpslaaay be framfiit^ Iidd 1^ fhe Supreme Ctou.rt in the cases of S<3rf»<^ltodte »ade^^. S^. Jtdiril Ifr Ctes^ & aBra^ ^aafc Karmn Slnafe yuaiabt. Ad3B'oeate 'Va. •Ittentlra^^^^^htmiat lftttavwi:aad'0rs.a. ;i:' • •'::•' ' .;: • ' • ' •" ' ' .:." ! ; 1 6. TheFeEore, at fliis stage, it cannoit toe sald fhat Itiere 1s 110 sudBxaent gmuads fia~ px)ceedaags and this Coiut te not required 1& examlae tlle inaterial in tfae chffcge sheet to fluMl out wfaettiOT a case a coriviction is made out or not. * • .. • • • •.' ' • '' . ' • ' • : •' : • . ' • • 7. The other submisskm of teu-ned ccnnMd fbr liie pet^^ durix^ tbe Crial, doGtor toas been caBammfid^aad lie tias d^osed >t2000^J.L.J.l2 3^996>4SeC76 w Braweea ^-fi ^4- tfaat^eomirimiiaiitsustamedcmlysimpfea^^ appredation of evideiice to be looked tato ty tfae tilal^Goui-t. The petittona", possfely, saay have some aQser remedy to seek diseharge, ifpea-missibleunderthelaw. 8. The otehr submission of leaiied coimeel fiM" e pAitJoner that It was acase of fl^e fightand ofifenGe has been re^stered agaiagt tlic complainant are also matters ofevidence to be considerM by^^ Gourfc TbSs Gourt would npt allow (he trial to be pre-emptel <MI siMatl submission, ••V • .''••• ••'.••••• ^ . • ' - . ' . • ' ' ' . • • • ' • . r 9. AecoTdii^ly, as a ressult of above diseussums, I do n^ ftad any inerit in tlils petilion. TTie petitdoa is liabte td toe dismi^ed and is hfilfcby disinlssed. Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge