The Single Judge noted submissions regarding the quashing of a trial court order that summoned only two accused persons from an FIR involving multiple accused. The applicant relied on coordinate and Supreme Court precedents to seek recall of the impugned order and summons against the remaining named accused.
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. - 14
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10035 of 2024
Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar,Abhishek Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.
1. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that initially a first information report bearing Case Crime No.0764 of 2018, under Sections 147, 447, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sarojninagar, Lucknow came to be lodged by the present applicant against five named accused persons, namely, Nirbhay Pal, Ajay Pal, Papu Singh, Sanjay Singh and Lala Singh. Its investigation was undertaken, which culminated in filing a police report in the form of final report. Thereafter, the present applicant file a protest petition, which was treated as a private complaint. The present applicant produced two witnesses, Sripal Singh Chauhan and Dilip Kumar Singh in support of his complaint. On the basis of which, learned trial Court passed impugned order dated 01.09.2022, whereby only two accused persons, Nirbhay Pal Singh and Ajay Pal Singh were summoned under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C.
2. His further submission is that the present applicant filed Criminal Revision No. 555 of 2022
to assail the aforesaid impugned order dated 01.09.2022, which also came to be dismissed vide order dated 29.06.2024, that too on the wrong premise that such order, if it is assailed by the complainant, is interlocutory in nature. He, thus, submits that the orders passed by the learned trial court as well as the revisional court, being patently illegal, deserve to be quashed.
3. Having closely scrutinized the prayer made by the applicant, it can safely be said that the crux of the prayer made by the applicant is that order dated 01.09.2022 should be recalled and proceed against all the accused persons, who were named in the first information report bearing No.764 of 2018, under Sections 147, 447, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow.
4. Reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the applicant upon a judgment rendered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Kailash Chaudhari and others vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 1993 SCC OnLine All 431.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant shall satisfy this Court as to how and in what manner the prayer seeking recall of the order dated 01.09.2022, passed by the learned trial court concerned by this Court, is permissible, that too in view of the law laid down by a Three-Judges' Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Subramanium Sethuraman vs. State of Maharashtra and another , reported in (2004)
13 SCC 324 .
6. List this case again in the week commencing 25.11.2024 as fresh.
(Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.)
Order Date :- 11.11.2024 A.Dewal
Digitally signed by :- ASHISH DEWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order summoning only two accused persons is recallable to proceed against all accused named in the F.I.R.
Whether the prayer for recall of an interlocutory order dismissing a complaint is permissible under Section 482 CrPC and the Subramanian Potharaju principle.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kailash Chaudhari and others vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶9
1993 SCC OnLine All 431 · Who else cites this
Subramanium Sethuraman vs. State of Maharashtra and anotherReferred¶10
(2004) 13 SCC 324 · Who else cites this
Ashish Kumar Singh
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others
Ajai Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
