Nasir Rana And Another vs. State Of U.P. And Another

Held

The Court held that it was not in dispute from the statement of Smt. Shreya Gupta that the applicants were involved in assaulting the raid team. At this stage, the Court's role was limited to considering whether any offence was made out against the applicants. The Court found that even in the absence of injuries, the offence of assault or using criminal force against a public servant could be attracted. It is a settled law that the veracity of prosecution evidence is to be tested at the trial stage, and the determination of which offence is attracted is a matter for the framing of charges. However, based on the prosecution's case, it could not be said that no offence was made out. The allegations of assaulting public servants and interfering with their duties were considered serious. Therefore, the question of whether the incident occurred as stated by the prosecution was a question of fact to be decided at trial. The petition was found to lack merit.

Facts

The applicants, Nasir Rana and another, filed an application seeking to quash criminal proceedings initiated against them. The proceedings stem from a First Information Report (FIR) lodged on December 5, 2024, concerning an incident where a GST raid team was allegedly assaulted and their proceedings disturbed. The applicants were not named in the FIR. Their involvement surfaced in the statement of Smt. Shreya Gupta, Deputy Director, DGGI Dehradun, who led the raid. She stated that the applicants, along with others, assaulted and pushed the raid team officers. The FIR was lodged by Kaushal Kumar, an Intelligence Officer, DGGI, Meerut Zone. The applicants argued that Smt. Shreya Gupta's statement was hearsay, that the informant was present and improvements in her statement were not tenable, and that there were no medical reports of injuries. The State contended that Smt. Shreya Gupta's statement, supported by other Intelligence Officers, clearly implicated the applicants in assaulting the raid team.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicants, who were not named in the FIR, can be implicated based on the subsequent statement of the raid team leader, Smt. Shreya Gupta, alleging assault and obstruction of official duty, thereby constituting an offence under the relevant provisions of the B.N.S. (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) and the Criminal Law Amendment Act, particularly concerning the alleged assault on public servants. Petitioner's Arguments: The applicants contended that Smt. Shreya Gupta's statement, recorded after the FIR, was hearsay and that improvements to the FIR's narrative were not legally permissible. They also highlighted the absence of any medical reports detailing injuries to the raid team members, including Smt. Shreya Gupta, to support the allegations of assault. Revenue/State's Arguments: The State argued that the applicants were involved in assaulting the raid team, preventing them from completing their official duties. They relied on the statements of Smt. Shreya Gupta and other Intelligence Officers (Sri Mayank Sharma and Sri Vikas Gupta) who corroborated the allegations of assault and obstruction.