Shanti Devi And Ors. vs The State Of U.P Thru Principal ...
2012 Latest Caselaw 2485 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 11
 

 
Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 2003 of 2012
 

 
Petitioner :- Shanti Devi And Ors.
 
Respondent :- The State Of U.P Thru Principal Secy., Home Lucknow And Anr.
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Narendra Gupta
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Vinay Kumar Mathur,J. 

Notice has been accepted by learned Addl. Government Advocate on behalf of respondent no.1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Addl. Government Advocate and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that a dispute relating to agricultural land was continuing between the parties in which an order was passed in favour of the petitioners and their name was mutated and they are continuing as recorded tenure holders of the land, regarding which dispute was continuing. Learned counsel has further stated that an F.I.R. was lodged on false allegations by the opposite party wherein a final report was submitted. Subsequently, by order of the court further investigation was ordered. The investigating officer recorded the statement of the injured and thereafter submitted chargesheet.

Attention of the court has been drawn to the copy of chargesheet and it has been pointed out that only the name of Smt. Prabhawati has been mentioned as a witness of fact. Rest of the witnesses are formal, but the court below vide order dated 02.5.2012, without due application of mind, has taken cognizance and has summoned the petitioners under Sections 419/420/467/468 I.P.C.

Learned Addl. Government Advocate has submitted that after proper investigation chargesheet has been submitted. Statements of the witnesses which were recorded earlier, were also taken into consideration while submitting the chargesheet.

The matter requires consideration.

Issue notice to respondent no.2, returnable within three weeks.

List immediately thereafter.

Till the next date of listing, no coercive measures would be taken against the petitioners.

Order Date :- 8.6.2012

A.Nigam