Court No. - 44
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13759 of 2018 Applicant :- Ram Singh Bhadauriya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ali Hasan,Istiyaq Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Ali Hasan, learned counsel for the applicant- complainant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed challenging the order dated 24.3.2018 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra, in Criminal Case No. 188 of 2018 (Ram Singh Bhadauriya versus Smt. Reenu alias Lakshmi and others), Police Station Sadar, District Agra, whereby the application under section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. has been treated as a complaint.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a perusal of the complaint filed by the applicant clearly discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. He, therefore, submits that once the application filed by the applicant under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence, the Magistrate has erred in law in directing to proceed with the application as a complaint case. He further submits that in the case in hand the dignity of the applicant, who is sought to be falsely implicated is involved. The learned counsel for the applicant has contended with vehemence that the court below has passed the impugned order in a mechanical manner and has ignored the judgement of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of U.P. and others reported in 2014 (2) SCC 1.
Learned A.G.A. on the other hand has supported the impugned order and has pointed out that the grievance of the applicant has not gone unattended by the court below. The court below after taking into consideration the entire gamut of the facts and circumstances of the case has rightly concluded to treat the application filed by the applicant under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. as a complaint. The applicant shall still have an opportunity to prove his case before the court below.
Considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
A perusal of the impugned order shows that no sufficient reason has been disclosed, on the basis of which, the Magistrate has proceeded to treat the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. as a complaint.
At this stage it would be relevant to refer to the Judgement of this Court in the case of Mahboob and others Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 2017 (2) JIC 320 (All) (LB), wherein this court has deprecated the practice of passing cryptic summoning orders. Paragraphs 11 and 12 of the aforesaid judgement are relevant for the controversy in hand which was reproduced herein below:
"11. In the present case, the learned Magistrate has not conducted any inquiry so as to satisfy himself that the allegations in the complaint constitute an offence and when considered alongwith the statements recovered and the result of such inquiry. There is ground for proceedings against the petitioners under Sectioin 204 Cr.P.C. There is nothing on record to show that the learned Magistrate has applied his mind to arrive at a prima facie conclusion. It must be recalled that summoning of accused to appear the criminal Court is a serious matter affecting the dignity self-respect and image in the society. A process of criminal Court cannot be made a weapon of harassment.
12. Learned Magistrate has passed a very cryptic order simply by saying that statement of complainant as well as witnesses recorded under Sections 200 and 202, CrPC are perused and accused are summoned such order per se itself illegal which could not stand the test of law"
A bare perusal of the allegations made in the application, reflects the existence of a cognizable offence. There are various judgement of the Apex Court that FIR of all cognizable offences must be registered. The Division Bench judgement in the case of Sukhwasi Vs. State of U.P. reported 2007 (59) ACC 739 has not gone into that aspect of the matter as to why the prayer for directing the registration of FIR of a cognizable offence should be refused. By refusing the prayer of the revisionist to get the FIR registered and treating the application U/S 156(3) Cr.P.C. as complaint without having regard to allegations made in the application is manifestly illegal resulting in miscarriage of justice.
In this view of the matter, the order passed by the court below is hereby set aside at the admission stage without issuing notice to prospective accused persons, who have no right to be heard as it is a pre-cognizance stage. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, District- Agra is directed to exercise his discretionary power and decide afresh the application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. moved by the applicant and to pass appropriate order in accordance with law keeping in view, the observations made by this court, within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
The present application is accordingly disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 24.4.2018 HSM