Court No. - 77
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46337 of 2019 Applicant :- Pooja Maneshwari And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Omvir Singh Rajpoot Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
This Application, under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed by the Applicants, Pooja Maheshwari and Richa, with a prayer for quashing of summoning order, dated 13.2.2018, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganjh, in Complaint Case No. 238 of 2018, Crime No. 100/17 under Section-380 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station-Kasganj, District- Kasganj, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj.
Learned counsel for applicants argued that Case Crime No.100 of 2017 for offence, punishable, under Section 379 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station-Kasganj, District Kasganj, was got lodged on the report of Anil Kumar Gupta, against Pooja Maheshwari, Richa and unknown person, which resulted in submission of final report, wherein, witnesses filed their affidavits and made their statement that alleged purse was taken by the daughter of the informant/complainant, herself, against which a protest petition was filed, wherein, upon an eqnuiry being made, this impugned summoning came to be passed, which is in abuse of process of law. Hence, for avoiding abuse of process of law and for securing ends of justice, this Application, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., has been filed, with above prayer.
Learned AGA, representing State of U.P., has vehemently opposed this Application.
This summoning is not on the basis of investigation made by the Investigating Officer, rather, it is in exercise of enquiry conducted by the Magistrate, under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., wherein contention of complaint was there and there was reiteration of complainant's statement, recorded, under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., with statements of witnesses, recorded, under Section 202 of Cr.P.C.
There was a marriage of complainant's daughter on 1.2.2017, for having services of a beauty parlour, she had been at above place. She was accompanied by her brother, Sagar and sister, Medha. Her sister, Medha remained with her. Subsequently, her purse was stolen and because of some situation and circumstances, arisen at that time, informant/complainant and his daughter came to their home, but got this case lodged, wherein, a final report was submitted. But, lateron, by means of protest petition, same contention was reiterated. Pooja Mahenswari is the owner of that very Beauty Parlour and Richa was helper thereat, who was present at that time and place and CW-1 is the girl, who herself was present and she is the victim of this occurrence of stealing of purse.
Under all above facts and circumstances,, impugned summoning order was passed.
Magistrate is not to make analytic analysis of evidence at the time of passing of summoning order, under Section 204 of Cr.P.C., rather, he has to see existence of a prima facie case for summoning, by way of application of judicial mind, at that juncture, which was very well there in the present case.
This Court, in exercise of inherent power, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is not expected to embark upon factual matrix because the same is a question, to be gone into, during course of trial, by the Trial court.
In view of what has been discussed above, this Application, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., merits dismissal and it stands dismissed accordingly.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
In case, if the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019/bgs/