Partly allowed

Ramesh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2024A482/8441/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-bench judgment examines a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application to quash a summoning order in a criminal complaint filed under civil disguises. The High Court noted the existence of a prior civil suit on the same issue. Quashing the summon, the court remitted the matter to the trial court to revert and hear the complainant regarding the pending civil suit.

What did the court decide?

Impugned summoning order dated 17.01.2024 quashed; matter remitted to Trial Court for fresh order after hearing complainant.

Ramesh and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:126692

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8441 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ramesh And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Tyagi,Neha Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Tyagi, learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA for State.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 4265 of 2023 (Smt. Neha vs. Ramesh and others), under Sections 120B, 323, 420, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Loni Border, District Ghaziabad as well as summoning order dated 17.01.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 10, Ghaziabad.

¶8

Impugned summoning order passed under Section 204 Cr.P.C. is reproduced hereinafter:

¶9

“ पतावलीपेश।पतावलीआजआदेशहेतुननयतहै।तलबीकेनबनदुपरपनरवानदनीके नवदानअनधवकताकोपूवरमेसुनाजाचुकाहै।आजपतावलीकासमयकअवलोकननकया। उलल्लेखननीय हहै ककि पररिववाकदिननी किकी ओरि सल्ले न्यवायवालय किल्ले समक्ष पवाररनवा-पत्र अन्तररत धवारिवा 156(3) दि.प.सस. पस्त त ु ककियवा रयवा, जजो न्यवायवालय किल्ले आदिल्लेशवानतुसवारि पररिववादि किल्ले रूप मम दिजर ककियवा रयवा। पररिववाकदिननी दवारिवा पररिववादि उपरिजोक्त कवपक्षनीरण रिमल्लेश, पदिनीप, शनीमतनी रिल्लेशवा, कवकपन कितुमवारि व सजोननू किजो तलब ककियल्ले जवानल्ले हल्लेततु मनूलततः इस आशय सल्ले यजोजजत ककियवा रयवा हहै ककि उक्त कवपक्षनीरण दवारिवा एकिरिवाय हजोकिरि किनूटरिकचित मतुख्त्यवारिनवामवाआम किल्ले आधवारि परि पररिववाकदिननी किल्ले पकत किल्ले नवाम प्लवाट किजो शनीमतनी रिल्लेशवा किल्ले नवाम किरि कदियवा औरि जब पररिववाकदिननी दवारिवा उक्त बहैनवामम किजो कनरिस्त किरिवायल्ले जवानल्ले हल्लेततु पहैरिवनी किकी तब कवपक्षनीरण दवारिवा उसकिल्ले सवार रवालनी रललौज किरितल्ले हहए मवारिपनीट किकी औरि जवान सल्ले मवारिनल्ले किकी धमकिकी दिनी। इस सम्बन्ध मम पररिववाकदिननी दवारिवा पतुजलस आयतुक्त, रवाजजयवाबवादि किजो कशकिवायत किकी परिन्ततु किजोई किवायरववाहनी नहहीं हहई।

¶10

पररिववाकदिननी दवारिवा पस्त त ु पपत्रत, पररिववाकदिननी किल्ले बयवान अन्तररत धवारिवा-200 दि.प.सस., पररिववाकदिननी सवाक्षनी मजोकहत कितुमवारि किल्ले बयवान अन्तररत धवारिवा-202 दि.प.सस. किवा अवलजोकिन ककियवा।

¶11

पररिववादि उपरिजोक्त किल्ले सम्बन्ध मम पररिववाकदिननी दवारिवा पस्त त ु शपर-पत्र, पररिववाकदिननी किल्ले बयवान अन्तररत धवारिवा-200 दिस.प.सस. मम कवपक्षनीरण दवारिवा एकिरिवाय हजोकिरि किनूटरिकचित मतुख्त्यवारिनवामवाआम किल्ले आधवारि परि पररिववाकदिननी किल्ले पकत किल्ले नवाम प्लवाट किजो शनीमतनी रिल्लेशवा किल्ले नवाम किरिनल्ले, पररिववाकदिननी दवारिवा उक्त बहैनवामम किजो कनरिस्त किरिवाय जवानल्ले हल्लेततु पहैरिवनी किरिनल्ले परि कवपक्षनीरणजो दवारिवा उसकिल्ले सवार रवालनी रललौज किरितल्ले हहए जवान सल्ले मवारिनल्ले किकी धमकिकी दिल्लेनल्ले तरवा स्वल्लेच्छयवा उपहकत किवाररित किरिनल्ले किवा किरन ककियवा हहै जजसकिवा समररन पररिववाकदिननी सवाक्षनी मजोकहत कितुमवारि किल्ले दवारिवा कदियल्ले रयल्ले बयवान अन्तररत धवारिवा-202 दि.प.सस. मम ककियवा रयवा हहै।

¶12

अततः उपरिजोक्त तथ्य एव पररिसस्रकतयत तरवा पत्रवावलनी परि उपलब्ध पपत्रत सल्ले कवपक्षनीरण रिमल्लेश, पदिनीप, शनीमतनी रिल्लेशवा, कवकपन कितुमवारि व सजोननू किल्ले दवारिवा किनूटरिकचित मतुख्त्यवारिनवामवाआम तहैयवारि किरि पररिववाकदिननी किल्ले पकत किल्ले नवाम प्लवाट किवा बहैनवामवा शनीमतनी रिल्लेशवा किल्ले नवाम किरिनल्ले, पररिववाकदिननी दवारिवा उक्त बहैनवामम किजो कनरिस्त किरिवायल्ले जवानल्ले हल्लेततु पहैरिवनी किरिनल्ले परि कवपक्षनीरण दवारिवा उसकिल्ले सवार रवालनी रललौज किरितल्ले हहए जवान सल्ले मवारिनल्ले किकी धमकिकी दिल्लेनल्ले तरवा स्वल्लेच्छ्यवा उपहकत किवाररित ककियवा जवानवा परए दृष्टयवा सवाकबत हजोतवा हहै।

¶13

आदिल्लेश

¶14

B अकभियतुक्तरण रिमल्लेश, पदिनीप, शनीमतनी रिल्लेशवा, कवकपन कितुमवारि व सजोननू किजो अपरिवाध अन्तररत धवारिवा-120 , 323, 420, 504, 506 भिवा.दि.सस. कवचिवारिण हल्लेततु दवारिवा सम्मन तलव ककियवा जवातवा हहै। पररिववाकदिननी पररिववादि-पत्र किकी पकतजलकप किल्ले सवार अकवलम्ब पहैरिवनी किरिल्ले। बवादि पहैरिवनी समन कदिनवासकि-19.02.2024 किल्ले जलए जवारिनी हजो। पत्रवावलनी कनयत कतजर किजो पल्लेश हजो।”

¶15

Learned counsel for applicants submits that before an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed by complainant on 10.02.2023 she has already filed a civil suit on 12.10.2022 for injunction. However, it was not specifically disclosed in complaint as well as it was also not disclosed in the statements of complainant and witnesses recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel further submits that in civil proceedings vide order dated 12.10.2022 a commission was appointed for inspection of plot in question. Learned counsel submits that there are various judgments of Supreme Court that complainant may not be allowed to give colour of criminality to a dispute which is essentially of civil nature.

¶16

I have carefully perused the impugned order find merit in aforesaid submission based on available record. Complainant has not come up with clean hands before Trial Court. Court also takes note of a judgment passed by Supreme Court in A.M. Mohan Vs. State Represented by SHO and another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 339 and relevant paragraph thereof is reproduced hereinafter:

¶17

“ 10. The Court has also noted the concern with regard to a growing tendency in

¶18

business circles to convert purely civil disputes into criminal cases. The Court observed that this is obviously on account of a prevalent impression that civil law remedies are time consuming and do not adequately protect the interests of lenders/creditors. The Court also recorded that there is an impression that if a person could somehow be entangled in a criminal prosecution, there is a likelihood of imminent settlement. The Court, relying on the law laid down by it in the case of G. Sagar Suri v. State of U.P. held that any effort to settle civil disputes and claims, which do not involve any criminal offence, by applying pressure through criminal prosecution should be deprecated and discouraged. The Court also observed that though no one with a legitimate cause or grievance should be prevented from seeking remedies available in criminal law, a complainant who initiates or persists with a prosecution, being fully aware that the criminal proceedings are unwarranted and his remedy lies only in civil law, should himself be made accountable, at the end of such misconceived criminal proceedings, in accordance with law.”

¶19

In view of above, application is allowed in part. Impugned summoning order dated 17.01.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 10, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 4265 of 2023 (Smt. Neha vs. Ramesh and others), under Sections 120B, 323, 420, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Loni Border, District Ghaziabad, is hereby quashed.

¶20

Since this order is passed without issuing notice to Opposite Party No. 2, i.e., complainant, therefore, matter is remitted back to Trial Court concerned to pass fresh order after hearing complainant taking note of filing of civil suit as well as judgment passed by Supreme Court in A.M. Mohan (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from today, if there is no legal impediment.

¶21

Registrar (Compliance) to take steps.

¶22

Order Date :- 6.8.2024 AK

¶23

Digitally signed by :- AWADESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramesh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Suchcha Singh vs the Board of Revenue and 4 Others

Mangru Pasi vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ravindra Yadav vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Naushad vs State of Up and Another

Ramdeen and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Uma Shankar vs State of U.P. and Another