Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6749 of 2018 Applicant :- Onkar Nath Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Birendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Birendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the order dated 6.1.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court no.8 District Kanpur-Nagar in Sessions Trial No.502 of 2012 (State Vs. Onkar Nath) arising out of case crime no.272 of 2011, under Sections 308, 504 IPC, P.S. Barra District Kanpur-Nagar and also summon the file of complaint case no.6712 of 2011 (Smt. Maya Devi Vs. Bhagwan Deen and others), under Sections 453, 323 IPC from the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.1, Kanpur-Nagar and conclude the trial of both the cases together.
The order impugned in this application dated 6.1.2018 whereby the application moved by the applicant for summoning the file of cross case of Smt. Maya Devi Vs. Bhagwan Deen and others, under Sections 453, 323 IPC, P.S. Barra District Kanpur-Nagar, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.1, Kanpur-Nagar, has been rejected. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is facing trial in S.T. No.502 of 2012, State Vs. Onkar Nath, under Sections 308, 504 IPC, pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court no.8, Kanpur-Nagar. It is argued that in fact the case instituted from the side of applicant is a cross case and no first information report was registered and thus the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was treated as a complaint case in which the accused have been summoned and the trial is pending in the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.1, Kanpur-Nagar as stated above. It is contended that the learned Judge without recording any finding as to whether the case in which the applicant is the informant is a cross case of the session trial pending before him, he has rejected the application merely on the ground that S.T. No.502 of 2012 has reached the stage of defence therefore, there is no good ground to summon the record of the case pending before the Learned counsel has further submitted that it is well settled that the cross cases are to be decided by the same Court and the judgments are to be delivered simultaneously and has relied the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Mishrilal, 2003 Law Suit (SC) 401. However, the learned Judge without recording any finding as to whether the case is pending before the Magistrate is a cross case or not, has rejected the application by the impugned order.
Learned AGA has submitted that without issuing notice to opposite party no.2, the matter may be disposed of finally.
After giving my anxious consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case and after going through the first information report lodged by opposite party no.2 and the averments made in the complaint case prima facie, it appears to be a cross case. However, since it is the prerogative of the trial Court to look into the facts of the case, I deem it fit to quash the order dated 6.1.2018.
However, the trial Court concerned is hereby directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order without being prejudiced by the fact that the sessions trial at the stage of defence keeping in view the law laid down as stated above. The trial Court is at liberty to take independent decision based on the factual scenario.
Accordingly, the order dated 6.1.2018 is quashed.
With aforesaid observation, the application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.2.2018 Hasnain