Court dismissed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash summoning order, noting a prima facie case existed. Applicants granted 30 days to appear and surrender for bail consideration; otherwise coercive action will be taken.
Application dismissed with direction to appear and surrender for bail application 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. - 77
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 688 of 2020
Applicant :- Km Bhuvneshwari And 2 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- R. P. Singh Parihar,Amrit Lal Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
The applicants namely, Km Bhuvneshwari, Narendra Singh and Ashok, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of the Court with prayer to quash the summoning order dated 20.8.2019 as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 3325 of 2018 (Rakesh Lawaniya vs. Km Bhuvneshwari and others), under Sections147, 148, 149, 323, 326, 324, 307, 325, 427 I.P.C., Police Station- Sadar District- Agra, pending before the Court of learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Learned counsel for the applicants argued that for the same occurrence, a case crime No. 980 of 2015, was got lodged at Police Station Sadar Bazar, upon the report Narendra Singh, against Rohit, Deepak and Nirmesh, for offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 354, 504, 307, 323, 506 I.P.C. Investigation resulted in submission of charge-sheet for those offences, against Nirmesh Singh, Deepak, Rohit, Dinesh Lawaniya. After a laps of more than nine months, this complaint with false accusation was got lodged, wherein impugned summoning order has been passed. Hence, for ensuring end of justice, this application has been filed with above prayer.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the above prayer.
From the very perusal of First Information Report, it is apparent that occurrence of above date, time and place with involvement of complainant side and presence of present applicants at above place, is undisputed fact. An occurrence took place on above date, time and place, wherein all those were involved. Now, the contention is this one that it is a counter blast case. Whereas otherwise contention is that because of being police officer, their case could not be registered, whereas case of accused was got registered and therein charge-sheet has been filed. But in all those circumstances, matter argued, relates with question of fact
and not to be seen by this Court or by Magistrate, at the time of summoning, rather, a prima facie case is to be seen, by application of judicial mind and it was very well there. Complainant, in his complaint as well as statement recorded under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., has reiterated the occurrence of above date, time and place. The same is with full corroboration of statement of PW-1 Anoop, PW-2 Rizwan, PW-3 Deepak and PW-4 Azhar. Medico legal report was also there. Under all above facts and circumstances and the proposition of law that this court in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., need not to embark upon the factual matrix, this application merits its dismissal.
Dismissed , accordingly.
However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within thirty (30) days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants 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 judgment 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 thirty (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 stands disposed of, accordingly.
Order Date :- 14.1.2020 Kamarjahan
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the impugned summoning order merits dismissal on the facts and circumstances.
Whether the applicants are eligible for consideration of bail application if they appear and surrender within thirty days.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶12
2004 (57) ALR 290
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶12
2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Km Bhuvneshwari And 2 Ors
State Of U.P. And Anr
Ram Krishna Gautam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
