The High Court rejected an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash criminal proceedings initiated against the applicants. The court found no illegality or irregularity in the lower court's summoning order.
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is rejected; the impugned summoning order is upheld; interim order is vacated.
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. - 86
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4682 of 2007
Applicant :- Sardar And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar Saini Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.2458/9 of 2004 (Intezar Versus Sardar and others) under Sections 323, 452, 504 and 506 I.P.C.,pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kairana, District Muzaffarnagar.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant crime due to party politics; the complainant has averred in the complaint that in the incident he and his family members have sustained injuries but there is no medical report on record. It is further argued that learned Magistrate has passed impugned summoning order without applying his judicial Magistrate and going through the evidence available on record. Therefore, the entire prosecution case against the applicants may be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has argued that the learned Magistrate has found that on the basis of oral as well as documentary evidence available on record offences against accused-applicants are made out and there is sufficient ground to summon them, thus the same does not call for any interference by this Court.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, this Court finds that no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the learned Judge in passing the impugned summoning order dated 19.08.2004.
The revision lacks merit and it is, accordingly, rejected.
The interim order dated 21.03.2007 is vacated.
Order Date :- 16.7.2021 MN/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned summoning order in the complaint case under Sections 323, 452, 504 and 506 IPC should be quashed on the ground of alleged false implication and lack of medical report.
Whether the Magistrate err'd in passing the summoning order without going through the evidence on record.
Whether the present revision application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has any merit.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Sardar And Others
State of U.P.
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
