1. By this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”), the applicants seek quashing of the first information report registered vide Vav Police Station II – C.R. No.3033 of 2008.
2. The respondent No.3 herein lodged the above referred first information report against the applicants herein alleging commission of the offences punishable under sections 504, 506 (2) read with section 114 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged in the first information report that the father of the first informant owned land admeasuring 8 acres situated in the sim of Village Vav. The said land was being cultivated by Dalit Ven Shankarbhai Kumbhabhai and his brothers on crop-share basis since the last two years. However, on the day of Akhatrij, they had asked them not to cultivate the land any longer, despite which they had continued to cultivate the same. It is alleged that the first informant was cultivating the land and on 28.3.2008, at about 12 O'clock in the afternoon, she had learnt that Shankar Kumbha was carrying on agricultural activities on the said land and hence, she and her mother Nathuben had gone to their agricultural field at about 12:30 hours and found that Vimal Kumbha and wife of Shankar Kumbha, viz., the accused herein, were cultivating the same, whereupon her mother asked why they are cultivating their land. Upon her asking so, the applicants herein got enraged and started abusing them and threatened them that if they come to the agricultural field, they would kill them. At the relevant time, since Vimal Kumbha and Shankar Kumbha were present there, they did not say anything and being afraid of the fact that the quarrel might intensify, they did not say anything. That on account of fear, she has come to lodge the first information report.
3. Mr. Mahendra Vora, learned advocate for the applicants submitted that in respect of the lands in question, civil proceedings are pending before the civil court. The applicants herein have been cultivating the land over a period of time and that the first information report has been lodged against the applicants herein merely with a view to pressurize them to vacate the said land. It was submitted that on a plain reading of the allegations made in the first information report, the ingredients of sections 504 and 506(2) IPC are clearly not satisfied, and as such, the first information report in question is required to be quashed and set aside.
4. Despite service of notice, there is no appearance on behalf of the respondent No.2 – complainant. This court has also heard Ms. Archana Rawal, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents No.1 and 2.
5. A perusal of the first information report shows that the offences alleged against the applicants are under sections 504 and 506(2) IPC. Section 504 IPC bears the heading “intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace” and lays down that whoever intentionally insults, and thereby gives provocation to any person, intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause him to break the public peace, or to commit any other offence, commits and offence punishable under the said section. Thus, for the purpose of falling within the ambit of section 504 IPC, a person should be intentionally insulted with a view to provoke him to break the public peace, or to commit any other offence.
6. Examining the allegations made in the first information report in the light of the above referred statutory provision, there is not even a whisper in the first information report to show that the first informant had been insulted in such a manner so as to cause her to break the public peace, or to commit any other offence. Under the circumstances, the provisions of section 504 IPC are clearly not attracted.
7. Section 506 IPC makes provision for “punishment for criminal intimidation” and the second part of section 506 makes provision for “If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc.” As is apparent on a plain reading of the title of section 506 IPC, the same makes provision for punishment for criminal intimidation. The expression, “Criminal intimidation” is defined under section 503 IPC, and lays down that whoever threatens another with any injury to his person, reputation or property, or to the person or reputation of any one in whom that person is interested, with intent to cause alarm to that person, or to cause that person to do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which that person is legally entitled to do, as the means of avoiding the execution of such threat, commits criminal intimidation.
8. Thus, from the language employed in section 503 IPC, it is apparent that the threat given should be with intent to cause alarm to that person or to cause him to do any act or omit to do any act as laid down there under. In the facts of the present case, on the allegations made in the first information report, it is not possible to state that the threat alleged to have been given by the applicants herein to the first informant is of such a nature so as to fall within the ambit of section 506(2) IPC. In the opinion of this court, merely saying that the applicants had threatened the first informant to the effect that if she comes to the field, she will be killed, would not fall within the ambit of section 506(2) IPC, the threat given should be given with the intention of causing alarm to that person as contemplated under section 503 IPC, which is not so in the present case. Besides, as noted hereinabove, in the instant case there are civil proceedings pending in respect of the suit land. As stated in the first information report itself, it was the applicants who were cultivating the said land and as per the say of the first informant they had asked the applicants not to cultivate the same. Thus, apparently there is a dispute in respect of the lands between the applicants and the first informant. On an overall view of the case, in the opinion of this court the first information report appears to be lodged for mala fide and vexatious purposes, with a view to wreak vengeance against the applicants herein to settle personal scores. Evidently a civil dispute is sought to be given a criminal colour with a view to pressurize the applicants herein. Under the circumstances, no offence as alleged can be stated to have been made out on the allegations made in the first information report. This is, therefore, a fit case for exercise of inherent powers under section 482 of the Code.
9. For the foregoing reasons, the application succeeds and is, accordingly, allowed. The first information report registered vide Vav Police Station II – C.R. No.3033 of 2008 is hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
[HARSHA DEVANI, J.] parmar*