Dismissed

Altaf Ahmad and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Allahabad HC12 Nov 2024/5016/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This mithrn under Article 227 sought to set aside a criminal summons. The High Court found that allegations of assault and abuse supported by witnesses justified criminal proceedings alongside a related civil dispute. The petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Petition for Article 227 interference to set aside criminal order and summons order was dismissed.

Altaf Ahmad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:74405

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5016 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Altaf Ahmad And 2 Others

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinay Misra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶7

Heard.

¶8

Present petition has been filed for the following main relief(s):-

¶9

"I. Issue an order or direction thereby setting aside the order dated 20.07.2024 passed in criminal revision no. 153 of 2023 Altaf Ahmad Vs. Shaharyar., contained as Annexure No. 1 to this petition, in the interest of justice.

¶10

II. Issue an order or direction thereby setting setting aside the criminal complaint and the consequent summoning order dated 05.05.2022 so issued by the Learned Trial Court thereby summoning the petitioner's to face trial U/s 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., contained as Annexure No. 2 to this petition, in the interest of justice."

¶11

Vide order dated 05.05.2022 the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/J.M., Court No.10, Bahraich (in short "Magistrate"), after considering the contents of the complaint, registered as Case No. 28802 of 2021 (Shaharyaar vs. Altaf & Others), as also the statement of the complainant and the witnesses produced by him in terms of Section 200 and 202 CrPC, summoned the petitioners under Section 323, 504, 506 IPC.

¶12

Vide order dated 20.07.2024 the Additional District and Sessions Judge, IIIrd, Bahraich (in short "Revisional Court"), dismissed the Criminal Revision No.153 of 2023 (Altaf Ahmad vs. Shaharyar and Others), which was preferred by the petitioners and affirmed the order dated 05.05.2022 passed by the Magistrate concerned.

¶13

Challenging the order(s) aforesaid, impugned herein, it is stated that to a civil dispute criminal colour has been given by preferring a complaint making allegations therein to attract the offense under Section 323, 504, 506 IPC and as such, interference of this Court is required in the matter.

¶14

Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned AGA appearing for the State submitted that if essentially, to a civil dispute criminal colour has been

¶15

given, then in that eventuality, the proceedings should not be allowed to continue. However, from the allegations or from the case of the prosecution if it reflects that the some incident took place which attract the offence indicated in the Penal Code, then in that eventuality, the criminal proceedings and civil proceedings can go simultaneously.

¶16

It is further stated that in the complaint case a Magistrate shall pass reasoned and speaking order and in the instant case, based upon the contents of the complaint and the statement(s) of witnesses in terms of Section 200 and 202 CrPC, the Magistrate summoned the present petitioners and as such, indulgence of this Court is required in the matter.

¶17

Considered the aforesaid and perused the record.

¶18

It is settled principle of law that civil or criminal proceedings between the parties can go simultaneously if from the allegations or from the case of the prosecution it reflects that the some incident took place which attract the offence indicated in the Penal Code.

¶19

From the copy of the complaint on record, it is apparent that therein complainant has indicated brief facts pertaining to pendency of the civil dispute related to Shahan. It has also been indicated in the same that on 12.04.2021 a compromise entered into between the parties at P.S.-Jarwal Road, District-Bahraich in relation to the dispute of throwing of garbage on the 'Shahan' of the complainant.

¶20

The contents of the complaint also indicates that on the same date i.e. 12.04.2021 in the evening at about 07:00 PM the petitioner No.1 has thrown the garbage on the 'Shahan' of complainant/opposite party No.2 and on being opposed, complainant/opposite party No.2 was assaulted as also abused.

¶21

The complainant/opposite party No.2 before the Magistrate concerned supported the case setup in the complaint.

¶22

Witnesses namely Gazaffar Hussain S/o Aneesh and Sajidull W/o Rafiuddin, before the Magistrate, also supported the story of the prosecution as indicated in the complaint which includes entering into the compromise on 12.04.2021 and committing the crime against the complainant.

¶23

In view of aforesaid, this Court finds no force in the present petition. It is accordingly dismissed.

¶24

Order Date :- 12.11.2024 Vinay/-

¶25

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

Altaf Ahmad and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Altaf Ahmad and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Tesamullah and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Nokhey and Another Vs State of U.P.

Pappu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Rajendra Vs State of U.P.

Ram Ji Maurya @ Ram Ji Lal Maurya and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Gorakh Nath Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others