Murari Lal And 7 Others vs State Of U.P And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 21344 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:161292
 
Court No. - 35
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28947 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Murari Lal And 7 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajendra Kumar
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

Heard Sri Ajendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, who are eight in number, Sri Devesh Nath Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

This application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the applicants to quash the entire criminal proceedings in Complaint Case No. 2 of 2022 as well as the summoning order dated 03.06.2023, under Sections - 323, 392, 354B I.P.C., Police Station - Nidhauli Kalan, District - Etah, pending before the learned Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Etah.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present proceedings sought to be alleged by the opposite party no.2 against the applicants as well as the summoning of the applicant nos.6, 7 and 8, under Sections - 323, 392 and 354B I.P.C., applicant nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, under Section -323 I.P.C. is not only malicious but also is gross misuse of process of law, particularly when it is a counter blast case, as earlier the applicant no.1 had lodged the first information report being F.I.R. No. 0219 against the opposite party fraction on 30.10.2021 at Police Station - Nidhauli Kala, District - Etah, . He further submits that even in fact another first information report has been lodged by the applicant no.1 against the opposite party no.2 fraction on 18.06.2022, though post lodging of the complaint case, but the motive of the opposite party is just to harass the applicants herein. He further submits that even in fact, there are ladies implicated also as accused in this case and by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the applicants have committed offence.

Sri Devesh Nath Tiwari, learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the argument, which the learned counsel for the applicants is raising centers around factual score, which cannot be gone into in the present proceedings particularly when the trial has not commenced. He further seeks to rely upon the Judgment in the case of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/S Neeharika, Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State Of Maharashtra and others,reported in AIR 2021 SC 192, in order to buttress his submission.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

Though, it is being sought to be shown by the learned counsel for the applicants that there is already a first information report lodged by the applicants fraction prior to the initiating of the criminal proceedings in the shape of complaint, however offences are made out and the entire arguments centers around defence, which can be taken at a stage when the trial commences. In absence of any pointing out of any jurisdictional error committed by the court below, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section- 482 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the present application stands cosigned to record.

.

.

It is open for the applicants to prefer an appropriate application seeking bail/discharge and in case the same is filed, this Court has no reasons to disbelieve that the court below shall consider it with most expeditions looking into the facts and the circumstances of the case, as per the law of the land so existing.

Order Date :- 9.8.2023

S Rawat