Court No. - 44
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13220 of 2018 Applicant :- Kamran And 10 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 has been filed challenging the summoning order dated 31.1.2018, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.5, Agra in Complaint Case No. 156 of 2016 (Kamil @ Shariq vs. Kamran and others), under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 452 IPC, P.S. Mantoal, District Agra as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case.
From the record it appears that initially the opposite party No.2 lodged an F.I.R. dated 14.9.2015, at Police Station Mantola, District Agra giving rise to Case Crime No. 121 of 2015 under sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 and 452 IPC. Upon the investigation of the aforesaid Case Crime Number, the police submitted a final report dated 19.12.2015. Aggrieved by the final report dated 19.12.2015, the opposite party No. 2 filed a protest petition, which has been allowed by means of the impugned order dated 31.1.2018. By means of the order dated 31.1.2018, the Magistrate has rejected the final report dated 19.12.2015 submitted by the police, with the direction that the case shall proceed as a complaint case and consequently summoned the applicants.
A perusal of the summoning order dated 31.1.2018, passed by the court below will go to show that the court below has recorded a specific finding that upon consideration of the facts and circumstance of the case as emerging from the statement of the witness whose statements were recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 Cr.P.C, the occurrence was prima facie found to be true. Furthermore, the Magistrate has also recorded a finding that there is an injured who has sustained injuries in the occurrence which took place. There is nothing on the record contradicting the aforesaid recital contained in the impugned order. As such the court is prima facie of the opinion that an occurrence has occurred in which some persons have sustained injuries.
In view of the aforesaid facts, it cannot be said that the complaint made by the opposite party No.2 is wholly false. Therefore, prima facie it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants.
This being the position, the relief prayed for is refused.
However, it is observed that if the bail has not been obtained as yet, the applicants may appear before the court below and apply for bail within two months from today. The court below shall make an endeavour to decide the bail application of the applicants in the light of the judgement of this court in the case of Brahm Singh and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. and Others, reported in 2016 (7) ADJ 151.
As an interim measure, it is provided that for a period of two months from today or till the applicants appear before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.4.2018 Arshad