HIGH COURT OF CHHATT3SGARH AT BILASPUR Sinaie Bench Hon'fole Shri DJIJD Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. APPUCANT NON-APPLICANTS Cr.iyi.P.No.598/2007 M.L.Dahariya, S/o D.R.Dahariya, Aged about 55 years, R/o LiG-53, Tulsi Colony, Rajkishore Nagar, Biiaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through- S.H.O., Akaltara, Police Station- Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa 2. Superintendent of Police, Janjgir- Champa, Olstrict Janjgir-Cha'mpa Pet|tjony?iderSeci|oii482_^^^ Procedure PreseiTt .: Ms. Meena Shastri, counsel forthe appiicant. Shri Akhi! Agrawai, Pane! La^vyer for the State. ORAL (Passed on 17 January, 2008) Heard on admission. (2) This petjtion Is being finally disposed Qf at the stage of admlssion. (3) Being aggrieved by the disparaging remarks made by the Sessions Judge, Janjgir-Champa In 23 of the judgment in Special Sesslons Case No.34/2007, the appiicant and has fiied this petition under Sectlon 482 ofCr.P.C. for expunging those remarks. (4) Jt is not disputed that Shri M. L. Dahariya, Senlor Deputy Superintendent of Poilce was the investigating officer in Special Sesslons Case No.34/2007 instituted against the accused persoris under Section 323 read with Section 34, 324 and alternative under Section 324 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3 (1) (X) of-:Scheduied Caste & Scheduied Tribe (Prevention of Attrocitles) Act, wherein the foliowing remarks v<'ere by the Sesslons Judge In- 23 of the judgment whlle the accused persons of all charges. 23. "fN'Nu ^t f^i^^ ^ -srRfqm ^ "^a^ ^Htorf '?t ^TC^TT ^t d^-41^'^^ ^t ^tf ^tter 7ift ^T 3iN M^W ^" ^W ^fcS'9 Sfsft^T^ •^R ^ ^i<fr!^l ^ Sl^fenF'T ^CT^ ^t f^liPl*! ^t ~^W t. "^ ST^W? ^^•t?) STT?ra ^t t f^ z— ^3: sr^ e-i^^rsiF? ^t sfN ''e^t ^^ w^ crN, ai^i4^-y<fr f^ift -^ • ^I 1^^TPH ^TT^ W^I^ ^O^clO^^R^i clR^d ^T-3f^T 3r£ft^^ •^1EIft ^ 3l1^l*S^ t ^f^-T <dv1*! ^"^rerFT t^fi^r ^ f^t ^^r ^t €q77T ^f ^<si<t»< ten TraT q1^?rto ^t^Ti t ^ ^^f^ W^PTf Wt <MT?T ^ft '^•MT ~^s[^ 4tf^^' siN ^i^ R^4i^T ^ ^dl^ ^? ^';TT ¥'R7te sr^^TFr t ?R" ^r^t ^Tcra" ^cft wt y^fif^T ^^TT -<HT8T ^- ^ ^tfen TTST •^' "ff'FTTto t. "q? ^ft ¥<ftcT ^tcTT t "<3^ ^r ^^r 3ffN ^r ^^ldA} ^ ST^PTH ^ '^•TT f^PT ^t. ¥^rf^ft^ ^TTS-T ^fei^ ^glPi^j^ yCTTl^4!^ ^wy Wt ^ftcf ~^t ^rt i' (5) Ms. Meena Shastri, iearned counsei for the appiicant produced, copy -of statement of Shri M. L. Dahariya, Senior Deputy Superintendent of Police which was recorded In the abovementioned Special Sessions Case No.34/2007 by the learned Sesslons Judge. It appears that the learned Sessions Judge was infiuenced by the fact that the jnvestigating offlcer did not record the statenient of independent witnesses i.e,, Raghunandan, Jayakaran, Prakash and Kaplinath who were present at the spot. However, cn that basis, learned Sessions Judge ought not to have rnade the disparaging remarks "^T^T 3^^f£IPf "f^rfN?T ^t f^ft ^^T ^t sqpT -^' f^ETT ^p?T tif^tor ^TT t" and "^HT^T ^t 1 ^tfeu -q^T ^ 9»Tlto t. ~^ ^ "fftftcT ^cTr t " bscause this was mere conjecture of the Sessions Judge. In view of the law iaid down by the Apex Court in The of Pradesh v, IWohaminad. Naim, 1964.8upreme Court 703 (V 51 C 85), the abovemeniloned remarks ought not to have made without giving an opportunlty to the investigating •officer to expiain the above conduct. (6) Shri Akhil Agrawal, Panel Lav^yer for the non-applicants/State has no objection if the abovementioned disparaging remarks are ordered to be expunged. •A' (7) In vlew of the above and .drcunistances, portions "^^<»l sr^^ i^^^ ^ f^ft ^^ ^ €?n^ ^' ^<sj^^ f^?TT -WT ^Rdtm ^tcTT t " and "^IM ^ ^ 1iftf^^ ^^ ^ ^TT^T t. ~S[^ tft ¥^KT ^tcTT t" appearing in para 23 of the judgment deserve to be expunged. According-ly, thls petition Is aliowed. The abovernentioned rernarks are ordered to be expunged from para 23 of the judgment dated 3" ^^- 23-07-2007 delivered by the iearned Sesslons Judge, JanjgIr-Champa in Special Sessions Case No.34/2007. (8) Consequently, I.A.No.1 for grant ofstay stands disposed of. Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge Tumane