Allahabad High Court
Raj Kumar Wahi And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 November, 2022
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Judgment reserved on 01.11.2022
Judgment delivered on 04.11.2022
Court No. - 84
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 44255 of 2019
Applicant :- Raj Kumar Wahi And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Singh,C.K.Parekh(Senior Adv.),Kumar Ankit Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
1. Heard Sri Kumar Ankit Srivastava, learned counsel for applicants and perused the record.
2. I find merit in the argument of learned counsel for applicants that impugned order dated 09.05.2019, passed in Complaint Case No. 149 of 2019 (Mata Prasad vs. Raj Kumar Wahi and others) under Section 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Luxa, District- Varanasi, is bereft of requisite opinion that there were sufficient ground to proceed against applicants as required under Section 204 Cr.P.C. For reference relevant part of impugned summoning order is quoted below :-
"परिवादी द्वारा अपने आवेदन व धारा 200 के बयान में अपने साथ अपने पुत्र रमेश यादव के होने का कोई कथन नहीं किया है। और न ही साक्षी पी. डबलू.-1 रमेश यादव द्वारा अपने बयान में अपने पिता के साथ होने का कथन किया है। साक्षी रमेश ने अपने बयान में कथन किया है कि उसके पिता को बहुत मारे पीटे। बीच बचाव किये जाने के सम्बन्ध में मेरे कथन नहीं किया है। सम्बनिधत थाना लक्सा द्वारा अपने धारा 202 (2) दं०प्र०स० जांच रिपोर्ट में कोई घटना नहीं होना पाया है। किन्तु किसी भी साक्षी का बयान जांच रिपोर्ट के साथ संलग्न नहीं किया है। ऐसी स्थिति में जाच रिपोर्ट स्वीकार किये जाने योग्य नहीं है। तलवी के भार पर प्रथम दृष्टया मामला देखा जाना होता है। परिवादी द्वारा अपने सशपथ बयान में घटना का समर्थन किया है। किस जेब से रूपया निकाला जाना कोई बयान नहीं दिया है। उपरोक्त तथ्यों व परस्थितियों को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए विपक्षीगण उपरोक्त द्वारा प्रथम दृष्टया धारा 323,504 कारित किया जाना प्रकट होता है।"
3. The above referred order does not meet the requirement of application of mind required in order to summon the accused persons which is reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of Lalankumar Singh and others vs. State of Maharashtra, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1383 and relevant paragraph No. 38 of said judgment is quoted hereinbelow :-
"The order of issuance of process is not an empty formality. The Magistrate is required to apply his mind as to whether sufficient ground for proceeding exists in the case or not. The formation of such an opinion is required to be stated in the order itself. The order is liable to be set aside if no reasons are given therein while coming to the conclusion that there is a prima facie case against the accused. No doubt, that the order need not contain detailed reasons.........."
4. None appears on behalf of opposite party No.2 though he was communicated by learned counsel for applicants and endorsement in this regard is placed on record.
5. In view of above discussion, the impugned order does not satisfy the test as required for the purpose of issuance of summons to the applicants that there must be an opinion that there are sufficient ground to proceed against applicants. Therefore the impugned summoning order dated 09.05.2019 passed in above referred case becomes erroneous and is, accordingly, set aside.
6. However, the matter is remanded back to the Court concerned to take a fresh decision on the basis of material available on record for the purpose of Sections 203 or 204 Cr.P.C., as the case may be, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is placed either by applicants/opposite party No.2 or through Registrar (Compliance).
7. The application stands allowed with aforesaid direction.
Order Date :- November 04, 2022
Nirmal Sinha
[Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.]
