Allahabad High Court
Nand Lal Patel And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 22 August, 2022
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 82
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20030 of 2022
Applicant :- Nand Lal Patel And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Jaya Nath Patel,Yashwant Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
By means of this application, applicants are seeking quashing of impugned summoning order dated 22.12.2021 passed by the Additional Civil Judge, (Junior Division) New Court III/Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur in Criminal Complaint Case No.328/2020, Registration No.10452/2020 (Usha Devi Vs. Nand Lal Patel) as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Complaint Case No.328 of 2020, Registration No.10452/2020 (Usha Devi Vs. Nand Lal Patel) Under Sections 420, 406 I.P.C., Police Station-Machhlishahar, district-Jaunpur pending in the court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) New Court III/Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur, by which applicants have been summoned to face judicial trial under Sections 419 and 406 I.P.C. before the learned trial court.
Learned counsel for applicants submits that a sale deed was executed by the complainant in favour of one of the applicants and also in favour of the complainant's son, but the same has not been challenged in any civil court and only to give a criminal colour, complainant has approached the learned Magistrate as such the proceedings may be set-aside.
The law in regard to interference with the proceedings of summoning order in a complaint case has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No.10634 of 2022 decided on 27.6.2022, that once the learned Magistrate after considering the complaint, statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. have come to conclusion that prima-facie case is made out against the applicants, this Court cannot interfere under the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
In the present case, complaint, statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., specifically narrates the allegations against the applicants in respect of the alleged offence committed by them under Sections 419 and 406 I.P.C. which has been taken note by the learned Magistrate by the impugned summoning order and considering the judgement of Supreme Court in Birla Corporation Limited Vs. Adventz Investment and Holdings Limited & ors: (2019) 16 SCC 610 and further in view of recent judgment passed by Supreme Court in Ramveer Upadhyay Vs. State of U.P. & Anr, 2022 SCC ONLine SC 484, that interference under inherent power of Section 482 Cr.P.C. could be exercised in exceptional circumstances and only when complaint did not disclose any offence or was patently frivolous, vexatious or oppressive. However, in the present case, complaint, statement do disclose offence so alleged, therefore, I do not find any illegality in the summoning order.
Application is rejected.
Order Date :- 22.8.2022
SB
