The High Court dismissed a petition under Article 227 challenging the summoning order and revisional order in a murder trial. Finding the petitioners actively participated in the crime, the Court held the orders were not illegal.
Petition dismissed; leave granted to apply for bail after surrendering within fifteen 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. - 66
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 506 of 2020
Petitioner :- Satya Narayan Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U P And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ekta Kaur,Jagriti Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
Present petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India has been filed with the prayer to set aside the order dated 19.12.2019 passed by Sessions Judge, Ballia in Criminal Revision No.83 of 2019 (Anup Singh and others Versus Lallan Singh and another) and the summoning order dated 19.09.2019 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia as well as proceeding in Criminal Complaint Case No.669 of 2019 (Lallan Singh Versus Anup Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No.603 of 2015 under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Rasra, District Ballia, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants belong to the same family and they have been falsely implicated in the present murder case. After thorough investigation, the participation of the applicants was found false and final report was submitted. The opposite party no.2, feeling aggrieved, filed a protest petition on which the applicants have been summoned to face trial. It is argued that except first informant who is son of the deceased, there is no other witness of the incident. It was a night incident and after investigation the participation of the applicants was found false, therefore, the orders passed by learned Magistrate and the revisional court are out and out illegal and the same may be set aside.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material placed on record, I find that the applicants are named in the F.I.R. who have actively participated in the commission of murder of the deceased. I do not find any illegality in the orders impugned passed by the courts below.
The instant petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India is bereft of merit and it is, accordingly, dismissed.
However, it is provided that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within fifteen days from today and apply for bail, the court below shall consider and decide the same as expeditiously as possible, strictly in view of the settled proposition of law.
Order Date :- 27.1.2020 MN/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order summoning the petitioners for trial in a murder case falls under the supervision and control of the High Court under Article 227 requiring it to be set aside?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Satya Narayan Singh and 2 Others
State Of U P and Another
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
