Disposed

Vivek Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC17 Sept 2022A482/12290/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application against a Revisional Court order that remanded a summoning order for fresh consideration. The court directed the lower court to pass a fresh order without being influenced by the Revisional Court's observations on merits.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with a direction to the remanding court to pass a fresh order on summoning without being influenced by the Revisional Court's observations on merit.

Vivek Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Judgment reserved on 06.09.2022 Judgment delivered on 17.09.2022

¶2

Court No. - 84

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12290 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sati Shanker Tripathi,A.K. Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Kumar Sharma

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶6

Applicant is a complainant in Complaint Case No. 1211 of 2017 (Vivek Kumar Vs. Nirdosh Kumar and others), Police Station- Atrauli, District- Aligarh is aggrieved by Revisional Court’s order dated 08.03.2022 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 12, Aligarh whereby revision petition of the opposite party No.2/accused was allowed and summoning order dated 18.07.2019 was set aside and the matter was remanded back for fresh consideration and to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

¶7

Sri A.K. Mishra, learned counsel for applicant submits that the learned Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has, after considering the criminal complaint filed by applicant, his statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C. as well as statement of witness recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. coupled with perusal of medical examination report of injured, come to a conclusion that there was a sufficient ground to proceed against opposite party No.2 and Revisional Court has acted beyond its jurisdiction and entered into the merits of case as well as interpretation of medical report as well as averments that allegedly police has facilitated medical examination of injured which was an alien document.

¶8

The opposite party No.2 is represented by Sri Pankaj Kumar Sharma, however, he has opted not to appear, though a written argument has been filed wherein he has supported the impugned order that injured was medically examined after about more than two and half months, therefore, this cannot be relied upon which has been rightly noted by Revisional Court. Sri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned A.G.A.-1 has also assisted the Court and submitted that matter has only been remanded back to learned Court of Magistrate, therefore, grievance of the applicant/complainant is premature as the learned Magistrate has passed a fresh order considering material available and he prayed that this application be disposed of with an appropriate direction to decide the matter afresh expeditiously.

¶9

In rejoinder, learned counsel for applicant submitted that in case Court is likely not to interfere with the impugned order, an appropriate direction be passed to the Court concerned that a fresh order may be passed without influence by the observations made in the impugned order.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record.

¶11

In the present case, the learned Revisional Court has set aside the summoning order and remanded the matter back to learned Court of Magistrate to decide fresh on the issue of summoning in accordance with law. Therefore, at this stage to interfere with the impugned order which does not a legal order so much as Revisional Court has considered the procedural aspect of the summoning order.

¶12

2 of 3

¶13

In view of above, without interfering with the impugned order, this application is disposed of with a direction to the learned Court concerned that the Court concerned may pass a fresh order on the issue of summoning, after considering the law on the issue without being influenced by any observation on merit expressed by the Revisional Court.

¶14

Order Date :- September 17, 2022 Nirmal Sinha

¶15

[Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.]

¶16

3 of 3

¶17

Digitally signed by NIRMAL SINHA Date: 2022.09.17 10:52:18 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vivek Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yogesh and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lav Kush @ Deepu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shakir and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Babu Ram Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravi Rai Vs State of U.P. and Others

Smt. Mila and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another