This is a Criminal Miscellaneous application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a summons order. The court found that authorities acted within their powers to remove encroachments on public land and dismissed the application as devoid of merit.
Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed as it is devoid of merits.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:214681
Court No. - 92
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32531 of 2023
Applicant :- Sonu Prasad Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Chaurasia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
herein by filing an application on 07-06-2017. The said protest petition was converted into a complaint on behalf of the applicant and after recording the statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. the learned Magistrate vide order dated 27-10-2019 summoned the accused Laxman Gupta for the offences under Sections 323 and 427 IPC. The aforesaid order dated 27-10-2019 was challenged by the applicant herein by filing the Criminal Revision No. 14 of 2020, which has been dismissed vide order dated 08-09-2022 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge against which the instant application has been filed. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia vide order dated 26-03-2015 has prima found the offence of a cognizable nature against the accused persons, therefore, he has directed for registration of the F.I.R. in the matter and on the same facts which were duly supported by the statements of witnesses under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate has summoned only Laxman Gupta and has exonerated the other officials of the Nagar Palika, the opposite party nos.2 to 4 herein, who have actively played role as per the direction of the said Laxman Gupta due to his personal enmity with the applicant herein.
for the parties, this Court has carefully perused the record of the case and from the perusal of the order it is apparent that the applicant has encroached upon the adjoining area outside the shop by keeping the generators and counters etc. which were due encroachment of the public land, which was not allotted to the applicant, therefore, the authorities have acted in accordance with law by removing the encroachment over the public land, which has no consequence with the shop in question allotted to the applicant. It is not apparent even to this Court in which case and in whose favour the stay order dated 20-07-2010 has been passed, therefore, if the authorities have ignored the said order while proceeding with removal of encroachment, have not acted in violation of any apparent orders of the Court and it is nowhere the case of the applicant that the authorities have dispossessed the applicant from the shop in question which is allotted to him. Therefore, if any case the action taken for removal of the encroachment by the authorities concerned cannot be said to be an any violation of any orders of the court. They have acted within their powers by removing the encroachments, which was encroached by the applicant herein on the public land.
Order Date :- 8.11.2023 pks
Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the summons order deserves to be allowed.
Whether the removal of encroachment by public authorities was criminal in nature.
Whether the opposite party officials violated any court order while removing the encroachment.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Sonu Prasad Gupta
Anish Kumar Gupta
Pankaj Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
