Partly allowed

Hariom Tripathi and Another v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2024A482/29498/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court set aside an impugned order summoning applicants for offences under IPC 323, 504, 506. The court held the order unsustainable due to lack of Union Interest and directed remand to the trial court for fresh order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 14.08.2023 set aside; matter remitted to trial court to pass fresh order within three months after hearing complainant only.

Hariom Tripathi and Another vs State of Up and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:152514

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29498 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Hariom Tripathi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nitin Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶6

The applicants before this Court are husband and wife. Applicant No.2 is sister of complainant.

¶7

Sri Nitin Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for applicants submits various arguments that complainant is an Advocate, and, therefore, in order to put pressure, present proceedings were initiated. There is some dispute in arrangement regarding partition of property which is the reason to initiate present proceedings. However, at this stage, the argument which has more force is that on same set of facts as mentioned in complaint and statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., learned Trial Court has disbelieved the part of complainant story about theft and without any reason other part of complaint case was considered to be sufficient to summon the applicants which is due to non-application of mind.

¶8

Impugned order is reproduced hereinafter :-

¶9

" -14/08/23 दद ि नन ां कन

¶10

पपुकनर करनययी गययी। पररवनदियी दनरन अधधिवकन उपससस्थित पररवनदियी कके दवदनन अधधिवकन कक तलबयी कके दबन्दिपु पर सपुनन गयन।

¶11

पतनवलयी कन सम्यक पररशयीलन दकयन।

¶12

प्रसतपुत पररवनदि मम पररवनदियी कन बयनन अनांतगरत धिनरन 200 दि . प्र . सनां . अनांदकत करनके कके उपरनन्त पयी . डब्लल , 1- ससैय्यदि धसनांकदिर आलम तस्थिन पयी . डब्लल 2- सत्यकेन्द्र धसनांह यनदिव कके बयनन अन्तगरत धिनरन - 202 दिनां . प्र . स अनांदकत करनयके गयके।

¶13

पररवनदियी दनरन अपनके बयनन 200 दिनां . प्र . स . मम बतनयन गयन हसै दक ददिनननांक 09/11/22 कक रनत 9 बजके जब मम अपनके घर मम नयीचके वनलके तल पर गयन तक मकेरयी बहन सनांगयीतन दतपनठयी एवनां मकेरके

¶14

बहनकई हररओम मपुझके पकड़कर मकेरके सनस्थि मनर पयीट व गनलयी गलकज ककी और मकेरयी जकेब सके 2200 रुपयके भयी लके धलयके तस्थिन मपुझके धिमककी भयी दियी दक तपुमनके हमनरके धखिलनफ FIR करनययी हसै तस्थिन मपुझके दिकेखि लकेनके ककी धिमककी दियी। मसै जब दनकट चचौककी गयन तक वहननां भयी ककई सपुनवनई नहह हहई। वके लकग मपुझके रकज परकेशनन करतके हम। पतनवलयी पर उपलब्धि सनक्ष्य कके आलकक मम जकेब सके 2200 रुपयके लकेनके कके आरकप मम तलब दकयके जननके हकेतपु प्रस्थिम दृष्टयन आधिनर पयनरप्त नहह हम।

¶15

पररवनदियी दनरन अपनके बयनन अन्तगरत धिनरन 200 दि . प्र . सनां . मम दकयके गयके कस्थिननों व पतनवलयी पर उपलब्धि सनक्ष्य कके सम्यकरूपकेण पररशयीलन कके उपरनन्त न्यनयनलय इस दनष्करर पर पपँहहचतन 323, 504, 506 हसै दक दवपकयीगण हररओम दतपनठयी व सनांगयीतन दतपनठयी अन्तगरत धिनरन भन . दिनां . सनां . तलब दकयके जननके यकग्य हसै। पतनवलयी पर उपलब्धि सनक्ष्य कके आलकक मम जकेब सके 2200/- रुपयके लकेनके कके आरकप मम तलब दकयके जननके हकेतपु प्रस्थिम दृष्टयन आधिनर पयनरप्त नहह हसै।

¶16

आद ेि शक

¶17

दवपकयी हररओम दतपनठयी व सनांगयीतन दतपनठयी कक अन्तगरत धिनरन 323, 504, 506 भन . दिनां . सनां . तलब दकयन जनतन हसै। पररवनदियी तलबयी हकेतपु आवश्यक पसैरवयी करके। पतनवलयी वनसतके हनधजरयी ददिनननांक 14-09-23 कक पकेश हक।"

¶18

I have considered the above submissions and perused the impugned order and since the later part of argument has substance, therefore, impugned order dated 14.08.2023 passed in Complaint Case No.4921 of 2022 (Anil Kumar Dwivedi Vs. Hariom Tripathi and another) under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police StationChakeri, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending the Court of learned Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division/Metropolitan Magistrate) Court No.10, Kanpur Nagar in its present form is legally unsustainable and accordingly, it is hereby set aside and matter is remitted back to learned Trial Court to pass fresh order within three months after hearing the complainant only.

¶19

Accordingly, application is disposed of with aforesaid observation.

¶20

Order Date :- 19.9.2024

¶21

P. Pandey

¶22

Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hariom Tripathi and Another v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hariom Tripathi and Another v. State of Up 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

Similar cases

Praveen Kumar Patel and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Kumar Varshney and Another vs State of Up and Another

Mohd Akil Khan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Priyanka Sinha and 4 Others vs State of Up and Another

Harsh Mishra and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Panna Lal and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another