Allahabad High Court
Shaitan Singh And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 26 May, 2022
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2704 of 2022
Petitioner :- Shaitan Singh And 2 Others
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Pandey,Amar Bahadur Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to stay the effect and operation of the judgment and order dated 13.05.2019 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj in Complaint No. 672 of 2017 (Lalaram Vs. Shaitan Singh and others), by which petitioners have been summoned under Section 364, 302 IPC, Police Station Sahavar, District Kasganj as well as judgment and order dated 08.03.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kasganj in Criminal Revision No. 21 of 2021 (Shaitan Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. and another), by which said order has been affirmed.
Brief facts of the case is that a FIR was lodged against the petitioners by opposite party no.2 stating therein that on 31.10.2015, the petitioners had kidnapped his 11 year old child and thereafter, his dead body was recovered from the canal on 04.11.2015. Number of injuries were found on his neck, who appeared to have been killed by strangulation.
On the basis of the said FIR, the police investigated the matter and submitted the final report against the petitioners. After receiving the final report, learned Magistrate issued notices to the opposite party no.2, who, on his turn, filed a protest petition with the prayer that the final report submitted in favour of the petitioners be rejected and they be summoned to face trial.
Learned Magistrate treated the said protest petition as a complaint and directed the complainant and his witnesses to get their statement recorded under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC.
Pursuant to the said order, statement of the first informant under Section 200 CrPC and that of his witnesses under Section 202 CrPC has been recorded. After making requisite enquiry and taking into consideration the entire evidence and material available on record, the learned Magistrate summoned the petitioners to face trial vide order dated 13.05.2019.
Being aggrieved by the said order dated 13.05.2019, petitioners preferred a revision before the court of Sessions Judge, which too have been rejected by learned Sessions Judge vide his order dated 08.03.2022.
Being aggrieved by the said order dated 08.03.2022, the petitioners preferred instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that while making enquiry, learned Magistrate has not considered the final report submitted by the police and as such, impugned orders passed by the courts below are bad in the eyes of law.
Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the said argument and has submitted that learned Magistrate after receipt of final report, issued notices to the opposite party no.2, who, on his turn, filed a protest petition and thereafter, learned Magistrate treated the same as a complaint and after recording the statement of the complainant under Section 200 CrPC and that of his witnesses under Section 202 CrPC, has passed the impugned order dated 13.05.2019 after taking into consideration the entire evidence and material on record and on the basis of last seen theory, had summoned the petitioners to face trial.
The said order has also been affirmed by the revisional court by a well detailed and discussed order dated 08.03.2022 and there is no illegality, impropriety or apparent error in the said order, which requires any interference in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction of this Court and as such, the instant petition is liable to be dismissed.
Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and taking into consideration the fact that learned Magistrate after submission of final report by the police, informed the opposite party no.2/ complainant regarding submission of final report, on which, complainant appeared before the court below and filed a protest petition, which was treated as a complaint and thereafter, learned Magistrate made requisite enquiry by recording the statement of the complainant under Section 200 CrPC and that of his witnesses under Section 202 CrPC and taking into consideration the entire evidence and material on record, summoned the petitioners to face trial. The said process is absolutely legal and do not call for any interference by this Court at this stage. Even revisional court has upheld the order dated 13.05.2019 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. There is no illegality in the procedure adopted by the courts below in passing the impugned orders.
It is well settled law that at the time of summoning the accused persons only a prima facie case is to be seen and it is not incumbent upon the Magistrate to making a roving enquiry so as to hold a mini trial. The impugned orders passed by the courts below are just, proper and legal and do not call for any interference, particularly when the entire evidence is yet to come.
In view of the above, the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.5.2022
Nadim
