In this criminal revision, the Court dismissed the petition seeking quashing of a summons order. The Court held that the lower court correctly summoned the accused to face trial and reversed the revisionist's claim of perversity.
The criminal revision was dismissed; the impugned summons order was upheld.
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. - 17
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2320 of 2003
Revisionist :- Harendra Singh And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- S.K. Dubey,A.K. Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
List has been revised.
None present on behalf of the revisionist.
The Revision cannot be dismissed in default. The Revision is to be decided on its own merits.
This Revision has been filed to quash the order dated 13.06.2003 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vth, Court No. 16, Jaunpur in Criminal Case No. 23 of 2003 by which he has issued a summon against the revisionist under Section 147, 148, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C.
Learned court order is perversed and suffer from manifesto error of law. Learned Magistrate without applying his mind summoning the accused for facing the trial. Order passed by the learned Court is illegal and hence, it requested that Revision likely to be allowed and quash the proceedings against revisionist.
I have heard the learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
On perusal of the record, it transpires that after perusing the statement under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., learned Magistrate rightly summoned the accused to face the trial.
There is no irregularity or illegality in the finding of
learned Court below. Court below rightly exercise its jurisdiction and after full appreciation of fact summoning the revisionist to face the trial. Revision is being devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed accordingly.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
The Criminal Revision is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order of this Court sent to the lower Court for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 7.2.2019 Mohit Kushwaha
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order summoning the accused under the Indian Penal Code should be quashed through criminal revision.
Whether the learned Magistrate exercised jurisdiction correctly in summoning the accused to face trial.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Harendra Singh And Others
State Of U.P.
Suresh Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
