Court No. - 72
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16076 of 2017 Applicant :- Vidyaram And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Pratap Singh,Lokendra Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record. As agreed, the matter has been proceeded with.
2. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants; Sri Ashutosh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and; learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 13.01.2017 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Jalesar, District Etah as well as the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 03/2016 (Naresh Vs. Kalyan Singh & Ors.), under Sections- 366, 380 I.P.C., Police Station- Sakrauli, District- Etah.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicants are brothers and widow mother of the main accused Kalyan Singh. It is then submitted, the learned Magistrate had passed the correct order directing for a police investigation, which has been wrongly set aside in revision.
5. The present prayer has been opposed by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learnd AGA for the State. They submit that clearly, the offence under Section 366 I.P.C. is triable exclusively by Court of Sessions. Therefore, after entertaining the complaint and recording the statement under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate completely erred in directing for a police investigation, as such course is clearly prohibited under proviso (a) to Section 202(1) Cr.P.C.
6. The aforesaid objection raised by learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned AGA does not allow for any exception to be made in view of the clear language of the statute and the undisputed position of fact that the complaint had been entertained and process had been issued after recording the statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C.
7. All other pleas raised by the learned counsel for the applicants, as to false implication of the present applicants, as they had no concern with the said Kalyan Singh and his alleged relationship with the wife of opposite party no.2, are matters that do not arise from the order impugned in the present application and the same cannot be gone into, for that reason.
8. 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 45 days 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.
9. For a period of 45 days from today, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
10. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.5.2019 Prakhar