Court No. - 77
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42362 of 2019 Applicant :- Sunil And 6 Ors Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- B.N.Singh,Manish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
The applicants namely, Sunil, Dharmendra, Ravi, Prem Shanar Goswami, Ishwari, Umesh and Deen Bandhu, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of the Court with prayer for quashing of summoning order dated 28.11.2000, and the proceeding of the Complaint Case (S.S.T.) No. 03 of 2001, Chiranju Vs. Sunil and others, under Section 395/397 IPC, Police Station Chaubeypur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Special Judge (DAA Act), Kanpur Dehat.
Learned counsel for the applicants argued that applicants have been falsely implicated and they have been summoned vide order dated 28.11.2000 in above complaint case, for above offences, where statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C., were not with ingredients required for constituting above offences. Affidavit of Smt. Urmila and affidavit of Sri Sipahi Lal, have been filed, wherein both of witnesses examined under Section 202 of Cr.P.C., have resiled from their statements, previously recorded. Rather, they have said that their averment was on the basis of information given by complainant and on this basis, this request has been made for quashing.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the above prayer with this contention that previously a proceeding under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., was filed against same summoning order and it was disposed of. This subsequent proceeding has been filed on the basis of affidavits which are neither evidence nor of any affect in above proceeding. Hence, this proceeding be dismissed.
On the basis of statement recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C., Special Judge, D.A.A., Kanpur Dehat, passed impugned order of summoning for offences punishable under Sections 395 and 397 of IPC. This order was challenged before this Court, where it was finally disposed of. Again, this proceeding has been invoked, on the basis of affidavits filed by Sri Sipahi Lal and Smt. Urmila Devi, those witnesses who were examined under Section 202 of Cr.P.C., with this contention that they are not aware of the occurrence. These affidavits are of no evidence and fact is to be seen by trial Court during course of trial. This Court under exercise of inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is not expected to analysis factual aspects, which is a question of trial before trial Court. Accordingly, this application merits its dismissal.
Hence, dismissed.
However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days and no more 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 Supreme Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.11.2019 Kamarjahan