The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 21.01.2020 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Mau in Complaint Case No. 1234 of 2017 (Amar Kishor Chauhan Vs. Lalita Chauhan and others), whereby complaint of the applicant has been dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. and to quash the order dated 30.06.2016 passed by learned Session Judges, Mau in Criminal Revision No. 114 of 2015 (Lalta Chauhan Vs. State of U.P. and others.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.None appeared for the opposite party nos.2 to 4.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has filed a complaint against the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 alleging therein that they have abused and assaulted the applicant due to dispute of ancestral property and that the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 were summoned vide summoning order dated 30.06.2015. It was further submitted that against summoning order dated 30.06.2015, the opposite party nos. 2 preferred a criminal revision no. 114 of 2015 (Lalta Chauhan Vs. State of U.P. and another) and the concerned Sessions Judge, allowed the revision vide impugned order dated 30.06.2016 by setting aside the summoning order dated 30.06.2015. It was submitted that in pursuance to the order of the revisional Court, the learned Magistrate passed the impugned order dated 20.01.2020, whereby complaint of the applicant has been dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel argued that both the impugned orders are against facts and law and thus liable to be quashed by this Court. It was further argued that there are clear allegations against the opposite party no.2 to 4 and thus a prima facie case for summoning the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 is made out.
On the rival side, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application.It was argued that there is no illegality or impropriety in the impugned orders, which calls for no interference by this Court in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. jurisdiction.
At the outset it may be mentioned here that the impugned order of revisional Court was passed on 30.06.2016 and the same is being challenged in the instant application after lapse of four years and thus so far prayer for quashing the impugned order dated 30.06.2016 is concerned, instant application suffers from vice of undue delay and laches. Even otherwise also no material illegality or perversity could be shown in the said impugned order dated 30.06.2016 So far as impugned order dated 21.01.2020 is concerned, perusal of record shows that the said order has been passed considering entire relevant facts and law. Further learned Magistrate was bound out to follow the directions made by the revisional Court. It is also apparent from record that both the parties belongs to the same extended family and the allegations regarding snatching of Mala from the neck of the mother of the applicant is highly improbable and that quite vague allegations have been made against the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 that they have trespassed into the house of applicant and assaulted him.
Here it would be pertinent to mention here that as per the procedure prescribed for proceedings with regard to the complaint case after recording the statements of the complainant and witnesses and the result of the inquiry or investigation (if any) under section 202 Cr.P.C., if the Magistrate is of the opinion that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding exists and he may dismiss the complaint. It is well settled that if a bare perusal of a complaint or the evidence led in support of it show that essential ingredients of the offence alleged are absent or that the dispute is only a civil nature or that there are such patent absurdities in evidence produced that it would be a waste of time to proceed further, the complaint could be properly dismissed under Section 203, Criminal Procedure Code.
In the instant case, it is apparent that the Courts below have considered the matter in correct perspective and the complaint of the applicant was dismissed by a reasoned order. It is well settled that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have to be exercised to secure the ends of justice, to prevent abuse of process of any Court and to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the Cr.P.C. depending upon the facts of given case. In the instant case, no such eventuality could be shown and there is nothing to indicate that there has been any abuse of process or miscarriage of justice. The instant application lacks merits and thus is liable to be dismissed.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.1.2021/S.Ali