Partly allowed

Sakhiya Alias Ram Sakhi v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC23 Jul 2024A482/9589/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal reference under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court held that the complainant suppressed a final report acquitting the applicant in an earlier FIR on the same facts. The court set aside the summons order recording the complainant as having no clean hands and remitted the matter for a fresh order after notice.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 14.09.2022 set aside; matter remitted for fresh order after notice to opposite party within 3 months.

Sakhiya Alias Ram Sakhi vs State of Up and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:126422

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9589 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sakhiya Alias Ram Sakhi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dev Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶6

Applicant before this Court is a woman and has declared herself to be a wife of Mahabali (since deceased). It is a case of complainant that present applicant is not a wife of Mahabali (since deceased) and she has impersonated herself to be wife of Mahabali and executed documents and committed offence of cheating and forgery with help of government officials.

¶7

Present case is arising out of an application filed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. which was initially rejected vide order dated 13.11.2017, however, a revision against it was allowed and matter was remitted back vide order dated 07.06.2018.

¶8

On remand, trial Court considered said application as a complaint and thereafter statement of complainant and witnesses were recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. respectively and present applicant was summoned by impugned order dated 14.09.2022 to face trial for offence under Sections 467 and 471 IPC.

¶9

Sri Dev Prakash Singh, learned counsel for applicant submits that an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed on 16.10.2018 disclosing a fact that earlier complainant has filed an application under Section 156(3) on same allegations against Lekhpal and Kanoongo wherein a direction was passed for lodgement of FIR, however, said

¶10

fact was half truth and in this regard, learned counsel refers contents of first information report lodged on basis of said application which is annexed along with this application that it was filed against Lekhpal Santosh Kumar, Ram Mohan Kushwaha, Revenue Inspector, Hira Lal as well as against present applicant.

¶11

Learned counsel also submits that a subsequent fact was also not disclosed that on above referred FIR, after investigation, a final report was submitted on 21.12.2017, that no case was made out against any of proposed accused including the applicant.

¶12

Learned counsel submits that he has no instructions whether any protest petition was thereon filed or not.

¶13

Learned counsel also refers statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. that it was recorded much after aforesaid final report was submitted as well as during argument also, learned counsel for complainant has not brought aforesaid fact before trial Court.

¶14

In order to appreciate above referred submissions, I have carefully perused the FIR lodged by complainant earlier on same facts that it was lodged against applicant also as well as that after investigation, a final report was submitted that no offence was made out against any of named accused including applicant. Name of applicant was mentioned at serial no. 4 in the final report.

¶15

Court also takes note of statement of complainant recorded in present proceedings much after aforesaid submission of final report that aforesaid fact was not disclosed, even it was not disclosed during argument before trial Court.

¶16

Accordingly, it is a case where complainant has not come up with clean hands and suppressed vital information. Complainant has stated half truth in application filed u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. There is no quarrel

¶17

on legal position that on same occurrence arising out of police report as well as complaint case may go together but question in present case for consideration is that since complainant has suppressed material facts before trial Court and failed to disclose that applicant was one of named accused in earlier FIR wherein final report was submitted, whereas in the present case, application was filed on a premises that present applicant was not named accused in earlier FIR which is absolutely contrary to record placed before this Court, would have adverse effect or not?

¶18

The Court is of considered opinion that such suppression has an adverse effect since in complaint case, the Magistrate has to conduct inquiry and therefore all relevant facts which may have bearing on order must be disclosed, therefore, impugned order dated 14.09.2022 does not legally survive and accordingly, set aside.

¶19

Court takes note that this order is passed without issuing notice to opposite party-2, therefore, this application is disposed of by remitting the matter back to concerned Court for passing a fresh order after hearing complainant in accordance with law, within 3 months from today, after taking note of above referred facts as well as in light of judgement of Supreme Court in Lalankumar Singh and others vs. State of Maharashtra, (2022) SCC Online SC 1383.

¶20

Order Date :- 6.8.2024 N. Sinha

¶21

Digitally signed by :- NIRMAL SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sakhiya Alias Ram Sakhi v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sakhiya Alias Ram Sakhi 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ashish Bhardwaj vs State of U.P. 2 Others

Majid Ahmad and 8 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Gautam Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Pankaj and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Sheetal vs State of U.P. and 7 Others