The High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to set aside a summoning order. The Court held that the FIR made out a case and refused to inquire into factual disputes of false implication left for the lower court.
Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to set aside summoning order is dismissed.
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. - 34
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26178 of 2021
Applicant :- Susheel Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Tinku Singh,Vijay Singh Gour Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to set aside the impugned summoning order dated 01.02.2021 arising out of charge-sheet dated 01.01.2021, under Sections 420, 423, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 63 of Copy Right Act (Amended), 1957, Police Station Bela, District Auraiya filed in connection with First Information Report dated 31.12.2019.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the first information report has been lodged against the applicant by the Branch Manager of M/s L & T Finance Company of Brach Sikandara that the applicant alongwith some other named persons in the F.I.R. was running a fake company by misusing the name of M/s L & T Finance Company. They are alleged to have taken Rs.1,000/- each for providing loan.
It is contended that the applicant is an employee of L & T Finance Company and had some personal enmity with the complainant, so he has been falsely implicated. Neither he has been arrested from the spot nor anything has been recovered from him on the date of incident. He was present in the other company where he is said to have working now-a-days. It is further contended that the distance between both the company is about 100 kilometres so it was not possible for him to be present on spot on the date shown in the F.I.R.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and contended that the applicant is named in the first information report. The supplementary charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant because he was not cooperating with the Investigating Officer in the Investigation earlier. The dispute referred by the applicant is a factual one, which cannot be decided by this Court. Hence, the prayer for dismissal of the application is made.
The allegation against the applicant is of defrauding the company by taking Rs.1,000/- per client for facilitating the loan. The allegations are serious. This Court is not supposed to embark upon an enquiry regarding the factual dispute put before the Court.
From perusal of first information report, it cannot be said that no case is made out against the applicant.
In view of the above, the present Application lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, this Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.
Order Date :- 14.2.2022 Radhika
Digitally signed by RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA Date: 2022.02.16 10:15:17 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the allegations in the First Information Report make out a case justifying the arrest and summons of the applicant under Sections 467, 468, and 471 IPC?
Whether this Court can decide the factual dispute regarding the applicant's personal enmity and false implication before the inferior court?
Whether the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and should be dismissed?
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Susheel Kumar
State of U.P.
Sadhna Rani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
