Allahabad High Court
Rampal Singh And 3 Others vs State Of U P And Another on 29 March, 2019
Bench: Vivek Varma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 33
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2072 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rampal Singh And 3 Others
Respondent :- State Of U P And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; learned AGA for the State-respondent no.1; and perused the record.
The instant petition has been filed with the prayer to set aside the impugned order dated 14.02.2019 passed by Session Judge, Moradabad in Criminal Revision No.222 of 2018 (Rampal Singh and 3 others vs. State of U.P. and another) and order dated 30.10.2018 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moradabad in Compliant Case No.2876 of 2018 (Smt. Mithlesh Devi vs. Rampal and others), under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kanth, District Moradabad.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that opposite party no.2 has filed an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. against the applicants along with three others, which was treated as complaint and the Learned Magistrate after taking evidence of complainant and his witnesses under Sections 200 & 202 Cr.P.C., summoned the applicants along with others to face the trial for the offences under aforesaid sections vide order dated 30.10.2018. Aggrieved against this order, petitioners preferred Criminal Revision Being Criminal Revision No.222 of 2018 before the learned District & Sessions Judge, Moradabad, which was rejected by the Court vide order dated 14.2.2019 and the order of the learned Magistrate was affirmed. It is this order which is subject matter of challenge before this Court.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that present criminal proceeding has been launched against the petitioners with malicious intention and just to harass as no offence is made out against the petitioners. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that both the courts below have not applied its judicial mind before summoning the petitioners and thus have committed gross illegality in passing the impugned orders. He further submits that no offence against the petitioners is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the petitioners. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this court under the writ jurisdiction. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Since, the petitioners have been summoned by the Trial Court, they will have various opportunities before the Trial Court to agitate their grievance at appropriate stages.
The prayer for quashing the impugned orders is refused. Accordingly, the writ petition is hereby dismissed.
However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, if the petitioners appear before the Court below in compliance of the summoning order passed by the Court below within 30 days of this order and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with the observations of the Full Bench of this Court in Amrawati and another Vs. State of UP, 2005 Cri. LJ 755, affirmed by the Supreme Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of UP, (2009) 4, SCC 437.
Order Date :- 29.3.2019
Ajeet
