Allahabad High Court
Babu Ram And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 July, 2019
Bench: Rajul Bhargava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 66
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12489 of 2017
Applicant :- Babu Ram And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind K. Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The office report dated 22.5.2019 indicates that notice has been served upon opposite party no.2, however, no one has appeared on his behalf. The State has also not filed any counter affidavit. Learned A.G.A. states that it is a complaint case, therefore, he does not propose to file any counter affidavit.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No.2702 of 2016 (Vijay Singh vs. Baburam and others) under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Bachhrayun, District Amroha, pending in the court of A.C.J.M./ Civil Judge (Senior Division)/ FTC, Amroha.
The brief facts of the case are that opposite party no.2 instituted a complaint against the applicants alleging that applicant no.1 came along with his son,Dharmveer at his house who was in a need, took Rs.50,000/- from him on the pretext that on account of bank being closed, he needs it immediately. It is further alleged that next day when the informant went to take back the amount advanced by him on 22nd of January, 2015, the applicants hurled abuses and also beat him.
Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that opposite party no.2 has filed the complaint as a counter blast to the complaint case filed by applicant no.1 vide Complaint Case No.3464 of 2014 against opposite party no.2 and by an order dated 30.9.2014 he was summoned by the Judicial Magistrate. It is stated that opposite party no.2 has surrendered in the said complaint case and obtained bail on 06.01.2015. Thereafter, as an arm twisting measure, present case was filed by him against the applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that when there was bad blood between the parties and opposite party no.2 was already summoned in complaint case filed by applicant no.1, there was no occasion for the opposite party no.2 to advance Rs.50,000/- to the applicant no.1 and subsequently when demand was made he had been beaten by them. He has further submitted that it is a case of no injury and apparently entire proceedings against the applicants smacks of mala fides. Therefore, entire proceeding of aforesaid case is liable to be quashed being an abuse of process of law.
Learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance in the case of Eicher Tractors Ltd. Versus Harihar Singh, 2008 LawSuit (SC) 1643 in which law down in the State of Haryana Versus Bhajan Lal [1992 Supp (1) SCC335] has been quoted and the relevant portion of the same is reproduced below for ready reference:
...(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
Thus in the cases where complaints have been instituted in order to wreak personal vengeance, the proceedings are liable to be quashed in exercise of inherent power of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
In the light of aforesaid, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed and the proceedings of aforesaid case are hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 9.7.2019
MN/-
