New Delhi [India], July 3 : Delhi's Saket Court on Monday refused to set aside the order of framing of charges against a person for assaulting on-duty police personnel. This incident occurred in the Hauz Khas Village area in July 2014.
Additional Sessions Judge Sunil Gupta dismissed the revision petition filed by Amanjyot Singh seeking to set aside the order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate in January 2020 for allegedly manhandling and assaulting on-duty police officials on the intervening night of July 19-20, 2014.
Magistrate court had framed charges against the accused under sections 186 (obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions), 332 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty) and 353 (voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty) IPC.
While dismissing the revision petition, ASJ Gupta said, "This court is of the view that the magistrate has passed the impugned order after considering all the relevant factors and there is no illegality so as to justify interference by this court in revisional jurisdiction."
The court rejected the argument of Singh's counsel that he was only 23 years of age at the relevant time and so he could not have consumed liquor as he was well below the statutory age of 25 years for doing that, which is absurd, to say the least.
"Merely because the revisionist was below the legal drinking age as prescribed in Delhi does not mean that he could not have consumed liquor or that it was absolutely impossible for him to do that," the judge observed.
The court also rejected the other arguments of the defence to the effect that it was not
believable that any reasonable man would argue with police officials for keeping the restaurants open till 01:30 am when it was already 01:20 am and that the MLC of the revisionist could not have been made within 10 minutes of the alleged incident are also of no substance.
"This Court is unable to see any impossibility in the sequence of events as mentioned above," the judge said.
The court also said that it is settled law that at the stage of framing of charge, the court has to see as to whether a prima facie case is made out against the accused on the basis of material on record or not.
"At the time of framing charges, the magisterial court was not expected to minutely scrutinise the evidence and see whether it was sufficient for the accused's conviction," the judge added.
The judge observed, "It is settled law that while exercising the power of revisional jurisdiction, this court can interfere only when the impugned order is perverse or untenable in law."
An FIR was registered at the Safdarjung Enclave police station against Singh and his father. His father died in 2017 and therefore the proceedings were abetted against him.
It is alleged that the father-son duo had assaulted on-duty police officials, including a woman sub-inspector after a verbal argument. This dispute arose over the closing timing of restaurants and pubs in Hauz Khas village.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor