Dismissed

Shyam Sundar and 8 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2024A482/9767/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This high court set aside a summons order under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court held that the lower court erred in summoning applicants without material evidence linking alleged head injuries to the victim's mental state or proving conspiracy. Impugned order relied solely on nature of disease without proper material basis for summoning.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 04.10.2023 summoning applicants to face trial under various offences was set aside.

Shyam Sundar and 8 Others vs State of Up and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:134370

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9767 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Shyam Sundar And 8 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Alauddin,Fakhruddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- Daya Shankar Vishwakarama,G.A.,Pankaj Kumar Tiwari,Saurabh Kumar Tiwari

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶6

In the present case, by impugned order dated 04.10.2023 passed by learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar, applicants (9 in numbers) were summoned to face trial under Sections 325, 504, 506, 452, 120-B, Police StationMaharajpur, District- Kanpur Nagar. The relevant part of impugned order is reproduced hereinafter :-

¶7

"ससुनना एववं पतनावलली कना अवललोकन ककयना।

¶8

पतनावलली कके अवललोकन सके कवकदित हलोतना हहै कक पररिवनादिली कके दनारिना अपनके पररिवनादिपत कके पहैरिना 4 मम कथन ककयना गयना हहै कक अकभियसुक्तगणणों नके कमलकरि पररिवनाकदिनली कके पसुत आशलीष कसुमनारि कवश्वकमनार्मा कलो गनालली गललोज दिकेतके हहए लनात घघूसणों व थप्पडणों एववं हथथयनारिणों सके घरि मम घुकरि स कई बनारि मनारिना पलीटना। पररिवनाकदिनली कके दनारिना अपनके पररिवनादि पत कके पहैरिना 7 मम कथन ककयना गयना हहै कक पररिवनाकदिनली के उक्त पसुत आशलीष कसुमनारि कवश्कमनाक ्मा कलो मसुललजमनान नर े इस प्रकनारिक से मनारिनापलीटना थना कक उसकक े थसरि एवक ं शरिलीरि मव गम ंभिलीरि चलोटव आई थली थजससम े वह मनानथसकक 17- रूप से कवकक्षिप्त हलो गयना हक ै थजसकना इलनाज उसह ्मालना अस्पतनाल कनानपसुरि नगरि मर कदिननाम ंक व 12-2019 4-01-2020 से क तक भितर्ती हलोकरि करिनायना थना। आगे कथन ककयना हक ै कक इलनाजह 27-01-2020 से आरिनाम न हलोनक े परि उसक े हक ैलह ेट अस्पतनाल कनानपसुरि मक कदिननाम ंक व से कदिननाक ंकव 05-02-2020 तक इलनाज करिनायना कफिरि भिली आरिनाम न कमलने सक े उसकना इलनाज मक टलम 08-03-2001 हहॉलस्पटल आगरिना म कदिननाम ंक व से इलनाज चल रिहना हक ै। अपनह े कथन कक ेक समथ्मान मर पररिवनाकदिनली कम े दनारिना आशलीष कसुमनारि कवश्वकमनाक ्मा कर े कचककत्सलीय प्रपत दिनाथखिलक ककए गए ह।ह पररिवनादिली सनाकक्षियणों नके भिली पररिवनाकदिनली कके कथनणों कलो अपनके बयनान मम समथथर्मात ककयना हहै।

¶9

अततः उक्त तथ्यणों एववं पररिलस्थकतयणों एववं दिस्तनावकेजली सनाक्ष्यणों कलो दृकष्टिगत रिखितके हहए कवपक्षिलीगण श्यनामससुवंदिरि , सलोनघू कवश्वकमनार्मा , सरिजघू प्रसनादि , शलीमतली शकसुवंतलना दिकेवली उफिर्मा गसुकड़ियना , शलीमतली सवंगलीतना उफिर्मा लनाडलो , अजसुर्मान कवश्वकमनार्मा , शलीमतली अनलीतना , शलीमतली अवंजघू शलीमतली गसुकडयना कलो अवंतगर्मात धनारिना 325/504/506/120 B भिना०दिवं०सवं० मम तलब ककए जनानके कना

¶10

आधनारि पयनार्माप्त हहै।

¶11

आदिेशक

¶12

अकभियसुक्तगण श्यनामससुवंदिरि , सलोनघू कवश्वकमनार्मा , सरिजघू प्रसनादि , शलीमतली शकसुवंतलना दिकेवली उफिर्मा गसुकड़ियना , शलीमतली सवंगलीतना उफिर्मा लनाडलो , अजसुर्मान कवश्वकमनार्मा , शलीमतली अनलीतना , शलीमतली अवंजघू , शलीमतली गसुकडयना कलो अवंतगर्मात धनारिना 325/504/506/452/120B भिना०दिवं०सवं० मम तलब ककयना जनातना हहै। पररिवनादिली कलो आदिेशत ककयना जनातना हहै कक वह धनारिना क 204 (2) दिवं०प्र०सवं० कके अनसुपनालन मम सनाकक्षियणों ककी सघूचली दिनाथखिल करिके तथना धनारिना 204(3) दिवं०प्र०सवं० कके अनसुपनालन मम सम्मन कके सनाथ पररिवनादि पत ककी प्रकतथलकप प्रस्तसुत करिके। उपरिलोक्त अनसुपनालन कके उपरिनान्त कनायनार्मालय दनारिना अकभियसुक्तगण ककी उपलस्थकत हकेतसु सम्मन जनारिली हलो। पतनावलली कदिननावंक -04.11.2023 कलो वनास्तके हनाथजरिली मसुललजमनान हणों।"

¶13

Sri Alauddin, learned counsel for applicants submits that applicant No.5 is wife of victim. The complaint was filed by victim's mother. It was alleged that all applicants came and assaulted the victim so much that he became mentally unstable and he is still under treatment. Learned counsel further submits that there is no relation between the alleged assault and treatment of victim for mental stability. All the prescriptions submitted before learned Magistrate were in regard to treatment of victim for mental disease, however, no medical document is being brought on record that victim has received a serious injury on his head, even there is no material that all the applicants have conspired to commit the said offences.

¶14

In this regard, learned counsel refers the statement of complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. which is reproduced hereinafter :-

¶15

"बयनान अवंतगर्मात धनारिना 200 दिवंड प्रकक्रियना सवंकहतना ।

¶16

कदिननावंक 04.12.2021

¶17

ननाम- रिनाजपकत, उम- 71 वषर्मा, पकत- गयना प्रसनादि कवश्वकमनार्मा, गनाम- बड़िगनां, प्रकेमपसुरि व थनानना- महनारिनाजपसुरि, कनानपसुरि नगरि नके न्यनायनालय समक्षि उपलस्थत हलोकरि सशपथ बयनान - ककयना कक कदिननावंक 12.3.2019 कलो मकेरिके लड़िकके आशलीष कसुमनारि ककी शनादिली सवंगलीतना उफिर्मा लनाडलो सके हहई थली। कमयनावं बलीवली आपस मम हमकेशना लड़िनाई करितके थके। पवंचनायत हहई तलो सवंगलीतना नके मकेरिके घरि 3.10.2019 रिहनके सके मनना करि कदियना, दिघूसरिली शनादिली करि लकेनके ककी भिली बनात कहली। कदिननांक व , , , , , कलो मेरिके घरि श्यनाम ससुक ंदिरिव सलोनघू कवश्वकमना्मार सरिजघू कवश्वकमना्मार अजसु्मान कवश्वकमनार ्मार अनलीतना , , , शकसुंतलनाव अंजघूव गसुकड़ियना सभिली आए औरि जबरिदिस्तली संगलीतना कलो घरि लव े गएक मेरिके बक ेटक े कलोक - , भिली जबरिदिस्तली ले गए। मसुझक े मक ेरिके बक ेटक े नक े फिलोन करिकक े बतनायना कक उसक े बहहत मनारिनाक पलीटना

¶18

, ककसने मनारिनाक पलीटना नहहीं बतनायना। मेरिके लड़िकक े कलो रिनाजस्थनान छलोड़ि आए। रिनाजस्थनान सक ेक , , चचौककी परि फिलोन आयना तलो पतना चलना। मह मेरिली बक ेटली दिनामनादि जनाकरि उसक े वनापस लनाएक ंव बेटक ेक । कना इलनाज करिनायना

¶19

Ms. Neha Khan, Advocate holding brief Sri Saurabh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 i.e. complainant has placed reliance on referred medical documents annexed along with this application as well as counter affidavit which is taken on record today, however, she has failed to show any medical documents that alleged assault on head was directly or indirectly related to mental condition of victim, even she has failed to show any injury report in this regard and that no statement was shown in regard to allegation of alleged offence of conspiracy.

¶20

In order to appreciate above submissions, I have carefully perused the impugned order as well as statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. It is a case of complainant that her son was mercilessly beaten by applicants which led to his mental disturbance and he is admitted for treatment, however as referred above, there is no material that present applicants have hatched a conspiracy to commit the said offence as well as there is no material either before learned Magistrate or before this Court which could link head injury to mental health. There is no document of head injury. Victim has not been examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C.

¶21

In the aforesaid circumstances, I do not find that impugned order has assigned reasons on basis of material available. Rather, learned Magistrate has swayed with nature of disease of victim without considering that there is no material before him to summon the applicants.

¶22

In the aforesaid circumstances, impugned order dated 04.10.2023 passed in Complaint Case No.9805 of 2020 under Sections 325, 504, 506, 452, 120-B, Police Station- Maharajpur, District- Kanpur Nagar, which is pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar is set aside.

¶23

Accordingly, application is allowed .

¶24

Order Date :- 21.8.2024 P. Pandey

¶25

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

Shyam Sundar and 8 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Sundar and 8 Others 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kanti and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Pankaj and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Dr Ashish Garg and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikas Jain vs State of U.P. and Another

Hasmat Alias Chhote vs State of Up and 9 Others