Court No. - 38
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15153 of 2019 Applicant :- Ravish Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abdul Khalik Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
This application has been filed under Seciton 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the summoning order dated 11.5.2017 in Complaint Case No. 1207 of 2015 (Ravish vs. State of U.P. and others), under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Pilua, District Etah pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Etah.
Heard Sri Abdul Khalik, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State are present and peruse the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the accused-applicant is innocent in nature and has falsely been implicated in this case. No medical examination of complainant was conducted of the injuries sustained to him. Learned Magistrate has summoned mechanically to the accused- applicant. He has further submitted that accused-applicant has already been bailed out. The entire proceedings is against the provision of law and also abuses the process of law.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant contending that the truthfulness and falsehood of the case, merit and demerit of the case cannot be adjudged at this stage.
In State (NCT of Delhi) vs. Shiv Kumar Yadav (2016) 1 SCC (Crl.) 510, it has been held by the Apex Court that 'the power of judicial superintendence under Article 227 or under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has to be exercised sparingly when there is patent error or gross injustice in the view taken by a subordinate court'.
The brief facts of the case is that the accused-applicant has been summoned on the complaint filed by the opposite party no. 2 with the allegation that the accused-applicant having common intention armed with lathi, danda and tamancha entered in the house of opposite party no. 2, beaten him and hurled abuses and on the objection raised by O.P. no. 2, he has also beaten Bitu, son of opposite party no. 2.
From perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said at this stage that no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant relates to disputed question of fact which cannot be adjudicated at this stage. At this stage, only prima-facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in above mentioned cases. Accordingly, in view of the above the prayer for quashing the summoning order dated 11.5.2017 is refused.
With aforesaid direction /observation, the instant application finally stands disposed of.
However, if the applicant appears in person before the lower court and file for discharge of application, the same may be considered as per provision of law.
Order Date :- 25.4.2019 Saurabh