Court dismissed application to quash summons order under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in a case involving assault and mischief, finding prima facie case existed. Directions given for bail consideration if applicants surrender within 30 days.
Prayer for quashing refused. Conditional direction issued allowing bail if appeared within 30 days.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 41
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35767 of 2019
Applicant :- Om Prakash And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Nath Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash/set aside the impugned summoning order dated 16.7.2019 passed by the C.J.M. Sant Kabir Nagar in Complaint Case No. 691 of 2018 (Radhey Shyam Vs. Om Prakash and others) under section 147, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, P.S. Bakhira, District Sant Kabir Nagar including the entire proceedings of the case.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that there is civil dispute in between the parties and second appeal is pending before this court. Prior to this complaint the applicant no. 1 has lodged an FIR against O.P. No. 2 and one another. In that case charge-sheet was submitted by the I.O. under section 504, 427 IPC. In counter blast and due to civil dispute this false and frivolous complaint has been filed against the applicants. In fact no such incident has taken place. No offence is made out against the applicants. The present prosecution has been instituted only for the purpose of harassment.
On the other hand learned A.G.A. argued that the learned Magistrate after considering the entire evidence available on record and finding a prima facie case has summoned the applicants to face trial under section 147, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC. There is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned summoning order and there is no ground to quash the proceeding of the aforementioned case.
A perusal of the record shows that O.P. No. 2 filed a complaint with the allegation that on 18.7.2018 at about 8:00 A.M. the applicants assaulted on O.P. No. 2 and his sons. When they entered into their house to save themselves the applicants entered into the house of O.P. No. 2 and also committed marpit and damaged the domestic articles. The O.P. No. 2 in his complaint version has examined himself under section 200 Cr.P.C. and he also produced Rajaram in support of his complaint version who has supported the complaint version in
his statement recorded under section 202 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate after considering the entire evidence available on record and finding a prima facie case has summoned the applicants to face trial under section 147, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC. I do no find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned summoning order. The learned Magistrate dealing with the complaint at this stage has to see only prima facie case and it can not be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. The disputed defence of the accused can not be considered at this stage.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the summoning order dated 16.7.2019 as well as proceedings of the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 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 Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days 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 :- 23.10.2019 Masarrat
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the summons order dated 16.7.2019 should be quashed given the civil dispute between parties and pending second appeal.
Whether allegations of false prosecutions and prima facie case in the impugned order are sufficient under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.Relied on¶12
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.Relied on¶12
2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Om Prakash and 6 Others
State Of U.P.
Bachchoo Lal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
