Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C/528 BNSS challenging a summoning order. Court held a prima facie case for interference based on Kunti judgment and stayed proceedings.
The proceedings in Case No. 9583 of 2022 before the Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich, were stayed.
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. - 11 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7170 of 2024 Applicant :- Ram Vilas And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Pathak,Sonal Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Rajesh Singh, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State-respondent.
Issue notice to the respondent no. 2 returnable at an early date.
Steps be taken within a week.
Instant application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C now Section 528 BNSS has been filed raising a challenge to the summoning order dated 04.08.2023 in Case Crime No. 9583 of 2022 Inre; Mayankar Vs. Ram Vilas and ors passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich.
It is contended that there is a dispute between the applicants and the respondent no. 2 which pertains to an incident where the applicants had complained against the respondent no. 2 and Sri Jay Shankar who were putting hindrance in the construction of the house of the applicants. The said complaint had been made to the District Magistrate, Bahraich, a copy of which is annexure 6 to the application wherein an incident of 28.03.2022 has been indicated where Sri Mayankar and Jay Shankar are alleged to have come to the site which was being constructed by the applicant no. 1 and had stopped the construction work and had also threatened the workers. Thus, it is contended that there is a civil dispute which has arisen between the parites.
In order to give it in criminal nature and in order to negate the said civil dispute, a complaint has been lodged by the respondent no. 2 alleging an incident of 01.06.2022 wherein the applicants are said to have barged inside the house of the respondent no. 2 and have taken away a certain sum of money.
On the basis of the same, the impugned summoning order has been issued.
Placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kunti & Anr vs State of U.P. & Anr. : Criminal Appeal No.1380 of 2023 , decided on 03.05.2023, argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is a purely civil dispute between the parties, which is now sought to be converted in a criminal case, which is legally impermissible keeping in view the law laid down in the case of
Kunti (supra) .
Considering the aforesaid, a prima facie case for interference is made out. As such, till the next date of listing, the proceedings of Case No. 9583 of 2022 Inre; Mayankar Vs. Ram Vilas and ors pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich shall remain stayed.
Order Date :- 14.8.2024 Pachhere/-
Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned summoning order in a criminal case involving a dispute with civil elements should be quashed.
Whether the proceedings should be stayed pending the determination of a dismissal order against the respondent.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kunti & Anr vs State of U.P. & Anr.Referred¶10
Kunti & Anr vs State of U.P. & Anr. : Criminal Appeal No.1380 of 2023
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ram Vilas And Others
State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
Abdul Moin
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
