HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 77
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 1698 of 2020
Applicant :- Jagdish And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
The applicants namely, Jagdish, Omwati, Luxman and Nannori, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of the Court with prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 313 of 2018 (Narendra Vs. Jagdish and others), Under Sections 452, 323, 354 I.P.C., P.S. Aonla, District Bareilly, pending in the court of J.M.-I, Aonla, Bareilly.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Learned counsel for the applicants argued that it was a false accusation, under abuse of process of law. There is variance in the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C. Hence, for ensuring end of justice, this application has been filed with above prayer.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the above prayer.
From the very perusal of complaint, it is apparent that it was filed with this contention that there had been some quarrel, regarding partition land in between complainant and accused persons, on 17.3.2018. On the same date at 3:00 P.M., while complainant along with his family members, was at his home, Jagdish, his wife and two sons, armed with lathi-danda, came there. They all did criminal trespass inside the house and assaulted complainant. When his wife Dayavati intervened, she too, was assaulted by them, wherein, sons of Jagdish outraged her modesty. Hence, this complaint. This occurrence was witnesses by Maiku and many others. The contention of complaint has been fully reiterated in the statement recorded under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. and there is further corroboration of statement recorded under Section 202 of Cr.P.C., in the inquiry made by magistrate and the Magistrate has summoned both of sons of Jagdish, for offence punishable under Section 354 I.P.C. along with other offences for which Jagdish and his wife, were summoned. Assault by doing criminal trespass, with abuse and threatening is there. Accordingly, impugned summoning order is with application of judicial mind on the basis of evidence collected by Magistrate in inquiry made by him.
This Court in exercise of inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is not expected to make analytical analysis of evidence and fact of the case, as the same is the question before trial court. Hence, this proceeding merits its dismissal.
However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within thirty (30) days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants 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 judgment 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 thirty (30) days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail, whichever is earlier, 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 directions, this application stands disposed of, accordingly.
Order Date :- 17.1.2020