In a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application, the High Court dismissed the prayer to quash a complaint under Sections 384 and 406 IPC and a summoning order, holding that the prima facie allegations disclosed an offence.
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. - 91
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 576 of 2022
Applicant :- Gajak Singh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Heard Shri Ravindra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Arvind Kumar, learned AGA, for the State, and perused the record of the case.
By way of the present application the applicants have made a prayer to quash the Complaint Case No.1345 of 2017, under Sections 384 and 406 IPC, Police Station Sirsaganj, District Firozabad as well as the summoning order dated 26.8.2019 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shikohabad, Firozabad.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the complaint lodged by opposite party no.2 against the applicants is totally on false and fabricated facts. In fact, the applicants are the victim and they suffered a lot due to mischief committed by opposite party no.2 and only with an intention to harass the applicants, opposite party no.2 lodged a false complaint against the applicants. He further submitted that the trial court also failed to properly appreciate the evidence available on record and in routine manner issued summoning order against the applicants although from the perusal of the entire evidence on record, no offence under Sections 384 and 506 IPC is made out against the applicants.
Per contra, learned AGA submitted that the complaint and the statement recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. prima facie discloses offence under Sections 384 and 506 IPC as the
opposite party no.2 gave his Buffalo to the applicants and after that the applicants forcibly took away their goats and refused to return the buffalo of opposite party no.2 without one lac rupees, therefore, offence under Sections 384, 506 IPC is prima facie made out against the applicants and there is no illegality in the summoning order.
I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case.
There is specific allegation against the applicants in the complaint and in the statement recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C.that opposite party no.2 gave his Buffalo of Rs. 60,000/- to applicant no.1 and after receiving the Buffalo, applicants forcibly took away the goats which they have earlier agreed to sell to opposite party no.2 and when opposite party no.2 demand back his buffalo then they demand rupees one lac.
At this stage, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants that the entire allegation is false, could not be appreciated, as prima facie offence under Sections 384 and 506 IPC is made out against the applicants. Therefore, no interference at this stage is required.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, dismissed .
Order Date :- 18.5.2022 SKM
Digitally signed by SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.05.24 19:47:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the complaint disclosing an offence under Sections 384 and 506 IPC warrants an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to be dismissed.
Whether an offence is prima facie made out against the applicants based on the complaint and statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gajak Singh and 2 Others
State of U.P.
Another
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
