Court No. - 42
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7336 of 2019 Applicant :- Suman Devi And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Milan Dwivedi,Anil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing entire proceeding of Special Sessions Trial No. 20 of 2017 (Angad Prasad Dwivedi Versus Braj Raj and others), under Sections 392, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Pailani, District Banda, pending in the court of learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), Banda as well as impugned summoning order dated 08.10.2018.
Learned counsel for applicants argued that a Case Crime No. 121 of 2017 was got registered at Police Station Pailani upon report of Smt. Suman Devi against Angad Dwivedi for offence punishable under Sections 354, 323, 506, 504 I.P.C. and charge sheet in it has been filed. This application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been filed by Angad Dwivedi as counter blast of same with false accusation. His statement, recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and statement of his son, recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C., were not with sufficient ground for passing impugned summoning order, but learned Special Judge has passed it, hence this proceeding with above prayer has been made.
The alleged occurrence is of 20.02.2017, for which above report through application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was got lodged as Case Crime No. 121 of 2017 upon report of Smt. Suman Devi against Angad Prasad Dwivedi and this resulted submission of charge sheet, whereas present occurrence has been said to be the same occurrence of 20.02.2017, for which proceeding by way of application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been filed and the same has been treated as complaint, in which complainant has been examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and his son Amar Nath has been examine under Section 202 Cr.P.C.. The Special Judge examined above evidence and has passed summoning order.
From perusal of statements, it is apparent that the occurrence is of 20.02.2017, for which above case was got registered by Smt. Suman Devi and for the same occurrence this complaint has been filed by other side, in which summoning order has been passed, hence it is a question of trial for realizing and analyzing the factual aspect. The jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is inherent jurisdiction and is to be exercised sparingly in view of law propounded in State of Andhra Pradesh v. Gaurishetty Mahesh, JT 2010 (6) SC 588: (2010) 6 SCALE 767: 2010 Cr.
LJ 3844, Hamida v. Rashid, (2008) 1 SCC 474, Monica Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2008) 8 SCC 781 and Popular Muthiah v. State, Represented by Inspector of Police, (2006) 7 SCC 296.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash impugned summoning order dated 08.10.2018 and the criminal proceedings passed in the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within four weeks from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants 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 judgment 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 four weeks from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 25.2.2019 NS