Dismissed

Smt. Jamuna Devi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC29 Jan 2024/221/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Appeal No. 221 of 2024, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the appellant's petition seeking quashing of an order rejecting her complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The court held the appeal lacked merit due to the absence of any medico-legal report affirming injuries.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed as it lacked merit.

Smt. Jamuna Devi Vs State of U.P… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:7916

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 221 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Smt. Jamuna Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Harish Chandra Yadav,Ram Suphal,Ramchandra Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Ram Chandra Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 20.10.2023 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Unnao in Complaint Case No. 49 of 2021.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was beaten by the accused persons on 31.08.2020 at about 10:00 A.M. with ' lathi' , ' danda' , kicks and punches, thereafter, she went to police station but her F.I.R. was not lodged. He further submits that one application U/s 156(3) of Cr.P.C. was moved by appellant before learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Unnao for lodging of F.I.R. on 17.12.2020 which was treated as a complaint case; after recording the statements U/s 200 & 202 Cr.P.C., the said application was rejected in the most mechanical manner with the observation that there is dispute between the parties which is civil in nature and only with the intention to exert pressure on private respondents, the criminal proceeding was initiated. It is, thus, submitted that indulgence of this Court is required.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of appellant and submits that it is a case of appellant that appellant was alone and was assaulted by four accused persons with 'lathi' , 'danda' , kicks and punches, however, she did not take any medical aid. He further submits that in case, four persons were causing injury to appellant then there must be some injury on her body but no medico legal report or medical prescriptions was annexed/filed with the complaint filed U/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. as well as before this court. He further submits that learned trial court, while rejecting the complaint, relied on the decision of

¶10

Apex Court in the case of Mitesh Kumar J. Sha vs. State of Karnataka and others reported in (2022) 14 SCC 572: 2021 SCC OnLine SC 976 , hence, there is no illegality in the impugned order.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal, F.I.R., complaint filed by appellant before learned trial court, statements recorded U/s 200 & 202 Cr.P.C. as well as other relevant documents; it is evident that it is a case of causing injury with 'lathi' , 'danda' etc. by four accused persons to appellant but she did not file any medical prescription or medico legal report either before learned trial court or before this Court. It is admitted case of appellant that when she was cutting some bushes, accused persons reached on the spot and assaulted her, thereafter, application U/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved in the month of December. It is also evident that no postal receipt related to the report which was sent to Superintendent of Police concerned is annexed with the appeal. Therefore, there is no illegality in the order passed by the trial court.

¶12

In view of above, this Court is of the view that the present appeal lacks merit and accordingly stands dismissed .

¶13

Order Date :- 29.1.2024 Arpan

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Jamuna Devi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Jamuna Devi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bhanu Pratap Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lucknow and Anr.

Dinesh Kumar Maurya @ Dinesh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sushil Kumar Sanwal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Vinay Mitra Dwivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Edu. Lko. and 5 Others

Ranjeet Kumar Chauhan (Loniya) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Nisar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another