HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 77
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 41905 of 2019
Applicant :- Imran And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
The applicants, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 360 of 2019 (Shahid Khan Vs. Imran and others), under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station Meerganj, District Bareilly as well as summoning order dated 23.07.2019, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Bareilly in the aforesaid complaint case.
Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicants argued that it is a counter blast case in response to previous summoning, which was passed upon complaint of applicant for offence punishable under Sections 406, Section323, Section504, Section506 I.P.C. vide order dated 29.04.2019, but Magistrate failed to appreciate it and passed impugned order for offence punishable under Section 406 I.P.C. The witnesses examined were family member of complainant. Hence, this application with above prayer.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the aforesaid prayer.
From the very perusal of complaint, it is apparent that complainant Shahid Khan solemnized marriage of his only daughter Uzma Khan with Imran, S/o Naqui Raza, wherein rituals were performed and money with articles were given. Subsequently, marriage was refused. Thereafter, Rs.3,00,000/- was paid to applicant. Subsequently, marriage was refused under pressure for getting property alienated, which was refused by complainant. Hence, this complaint was filed. Magistrate took cognizance and examined complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C., wherein narration has been made by him. Two witnesses under Sectionsection 202 Cr.P.C. were examined with same reiteration and on the basis of above evidence, impugned summoning order was passed. There is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order.
Regarding counter blast, it may be a motive for either way. But, it is to be seen after recording of evidence under Section 244 Cr.P.C. as to whether there is ground for discharge or for proceeding further by way of framing charge etc. This Court in exercise of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not expected to embark upon factual aspect because the same is course before trial court.
In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicants the application so far as it relates to seeking quashing of the entire proceeding as well as summoning order stands dismissed.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon’ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid observations, this application is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 25.11.2019