Allahabad High Court
Hirambh Nath @ Hiramb Nath And 3 ... vs State Of U.P. And Another on 26 March, 2019
Bench: Bachchoo Lal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10562 of 2019
Applicant :- Hirambh Nath @ Hiramb Nath And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Mustafa,Afshan Shafaut
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Criminal Complaint Case No. 415 of 2018 (Nisha Vs. Hirambh Nath & others) and consequential impugned summoning order dated 13.12.2018 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/Judicial Magistrate, Naugarh, Siddharth Nagar, under section 323, 504, 506, 379, 427, 452 IPC, P.S. Lotan, District Siddharth Nagar pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/Judicial Magistrate, Naugarh, Siddharth Nagar.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicant no. 1 is the real uncle of O.P. No. 2 and applicant nos. 2 to 4 are the family members of applicant no. 1. In fact, there is dispute of property in between applicants and O.P. No. 2. The O.P. No. 2 has also filed a civil suit no. 315 of 2014 against applicant no. 1. In that case no injunction order was passed due to which only to make pressure upon the applicants the O.P. No. 2 has filed this false and frivolous complaint against the applicants. It has further been submitted that there is no independent witness. The witnesses who have been examined under section 202 Cr.P.C. belong to other village. The applicants have not committed the alleged offence. The present prosecution has been instituted only for the purpose of harassment.
On the other hand learned A.G.A. argued that the applicants have been summoned to face the trial on the basis of statements of complainant and witnesses recorded under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate after considering the entire evidence available on record and finding a prima facie case has summoned the applicants. There is no illegality or irregularity in the summoning order and there is no ground to quash the proceedings of the aforementioned case.
A perusal of the record shows that the O.P. No. 2 in her complaint it has mentioned that the disputed property belongs to father of O.P. No. 2. After the death of her father the O.P. No. 2 became owner of the alleged property. The applicants want to take possession over the property of O.P. No. 2 due to which on the date of alleged incident the applicants took away the domestic articles from the house of O.P. No. 2 and also threatened to her. The O.P. No. 2/complainant in her statement recorded under section 200 Cr.P.C. has also supported the complaint version. The witnesses in their statements recorded under section 202 Cr.P.C. have also supported the complaint version. The learned Magistrate after considering the entire evidence available on record and finding a prima facie case has summoned the applicants to face the trial. The learned Magistrate dealing with the complaint at this stage has to see only prima facie case and it can not be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the entire proceeding of the aforementioned case as well as summoning order dated 13.12.2018, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
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 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 is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.3.2019
Masarrat
