Court No. - 80
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19502 of 2020 Applicant :- Vishal Verma And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Dutta Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 20.01.2020, passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Fast Track/Judicial Magistrate, Mathura, in Complaint Case No. 238 of 2020 (Prakhar Chaturvedi vs. Vishal Verma & Anr.), under Sections 384, 323, 452, 504 and 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Mathura, pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Fast Tract/Judicial Magistrate, Mathura as well as to quash the order dated 30.10.2020 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, in Criminal Revision No. 92 of 2020 (Vishal Verma and another vs. State of U.P. and another.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and complaint has been lodged making false and baseless allegations against them. It has been submitted that applicant no.1 has filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against respondent no.2 and one Vikas Chaturvedi on 21.11.2015 which was later on registered as a complaint case and after that the impugned complaint was filed on 25.11.2015 as a counterblast. The Courts below have not considered the matter in correct perspective and that applicants have been summoned in a routine manner. The Magistrate did not get conduct any investigation by police under Section 202 Cr.P.C. It has been further submitted that witnesses examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C. were not named in complaint. Learned counsel submitted that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants and that the revision against the summoning order was also dismissed without considering the material on record.
Per contra learned A.G.A. submitted that the impugned summoning order has already been upheld by the Revisional Court and that there is no illegality or impropriety in the impugned orders.
In the instant matter, the only prayer of applicants is to quash the above stated impugned summoning order dated 20.01.2020 and the impugned order dated 30.10.2020 passed by the Revisional Court, whereby the revision against the said summoning order has been dismissed. It is well settled that at the stage of summoning only it has to be seen whether a prima facie case is made out or not. At this stage a mini trial cannot be held and the Court can shift and weigh the evidence for limited purpose of finding out whether or not a prima facie case against the applicant is made out or not. Where material placed on record discloses grave suspicion against the accused, which has not been properly examined, the Court duly justified in framing charge. Adjudication of questions of fact and appreciation of evidence or examining the credibility of version of complainant, does not fall with the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
In the instant case, the allegations made in complaint and statement of complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and statement of witnesses recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C., it cannot be said that a prima facie case is not made out. Perusal of record shows that the Revisional Court has also examined the matter in detail and the revision was dismissed vide impugned order dated 30.10.2020. There is nothing to indicate that there is any abuse of the process of Court or there has been any miscarriage of justice, so as to require any interference by this Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Thus, the prayer for quashing the impugned orders is refused.
However, keeping in view the facts of matter, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before Court below within a period of 30 days from today and apply for bail, the same shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with well settled law. For a period of 30 days or till the applicants surrender before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
The application is disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 5.1.2021 A. Tripathi