Ramapati And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 21168 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 88
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40923 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Ramapati And 3 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Kumar Dwivedi,Dashrath Lal Dwivedi
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

Heard Sri Shashi Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Hari Pratap Gupta, learned A.G.A, who appears for the State of U.P..

This application under Section 482 of the CrPC filed for quashing the entire proceedings of complaint No. 1121 of 2019 (Durgawati Vs. Ramapati and others) and summoning order dated 20.9.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No. 7, Allahabad. Summoning the applicants for the offence of under Section 323, 354, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Phoolpur, District- Allahabad.

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that a complaint has been lodged by the O.P No. 2 against the applicant on 28.3.2019 with relation to the offences committed on 16.1.2019 regarding encroachment upon all the agriculture fields of the O.P. No. 2 in order to grab the said land and to destroy the crops and also hurled abuses and administered beating and also threatened them. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that prior to it on 20.11.2018 a first information report had been lodged by the accused faction against the complainant faction to which a charge-sheet was also submitted under Sections 427, 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 on 4.6.2019 and the present proceedings is nothing but a counterblast just in order to falsely implicate the applicant.

Countering the said submissions, learned A.G.A has opposed the application while arguing that the present proceedings are justified and needs no interference in the present jurisdiction particularly when the factual disputes are being sought to be raised without there being pointing out of any jurisdictional error.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record and find myself unable to subscribe to the contentions of the learned counsel for the applicant, as the entire argument is factual without indicating any jurisdictional error and, in particular, the fact that these are the defence which shall remain available to the applicants to raise at the time when the trial starts. This Court cannot make a factual roving enquiry in present proceeding in view of the law laid down in view of the judgment in the case of M/S Neeharika, Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State Of Maharashtra and others reported in AIR 2021 SC 192.

Accordingly, the present application stands dismissed and consigned to record.

Order Date :- 15.12.2022

N.S.Rathour