Court No. - 72
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35866 of 2017 Applicant :- Ram Niwas Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Juned Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Juned Alam, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. on behalf of State.
2. Present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 04.08.2017 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasya, Kushi Nagar as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.1410 of 2016 (Gopi Nath Vs. Ram Niwas), P.S. Kotwali Hata, District Kushi Nagar, under Sections 323, 420 and 504 IPC pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasya, Kushi Nagar.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant Ram Niwas was born to Indrasan, however, he was adopted by Jeevanand who is his uncle (real brother of Indrasan). In view of such formal adoption being complete, the applicant lost his rights of succession under Indrasan but gained those rights under Jeevanand. Further submission is that applicant's name had wrongly been recorded through mutation though he had not been claiming any rights in the properties of Indrasan.
4. However, it is difficult to accept such contention as mutation entries do not arise of their own. It is only upon the death being reported and claim being made that such entries are normally recorded. The opposite party no. 2 had certainly not got the name of the present applicant recorded. Hence, it is to be assumed at this stage that it is the applicant who would have got the name entered through mutation. Thus, prima facie, ingredients of offence are made out. The prayer for quashing of the entire proceedings of complaint case is refused.
5. However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 45 days from today and applies for bail, his 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.
6. For a period of 45 days, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.
7. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally
disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.5.2019 Meenu