Allahabad High Court
Girish Narain Singh vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 12 May, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:103488
Court No. - 70
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3264 of 2023
Petitioner :- Girish Narain Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Harish Chandra
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1) Petitioner has filed this petition for quashing the judgment dated 2501.2023 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Ghaziabad in Criminal Revision No. 532 of 2022, whereby the criminal revision filed by the accused-respondents was allowed and summoning order dated 08.0702022 passed by learned Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No. 2, Ghaziabad was set aside.
2) Record discloses that initially an FIR was lodged by the respondents against the petitioner vide Case Crime No. 92 of 2021, under Sections 306,511,506 IPC and it is alleged that during investigation petitioner's name has been exonerated. It is also alleged in the complaint that the respondents accused also got the same published in the news paper and this act of accused caused harm to the reputation of the petitioner and his family members. Thereafter, petitioner is said to have filed a complaint against the respondents no. 2 & 3 for offences under Sections 384,499,500 IPC and the court below after recording the statement of the complainant and his witnesses summoned the accused/respondents no. 2 & 3 for the offences under Section 500 IPC vide order dated 8.7.2022. Against the same, respondents no. 2 & 3 preferred criminal revision which was allowed vide order dated 25.01.2023 and the summoning order was set aside.
3) It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the revisional court has failed to consider the evidence on record and illegally passed the impugned order.
4) Perused the impugned judgment and order passed by the revisional court. Learned revisional Court gave the finding that the grounds taken by the revisionists/accused that in the present case the final report has not yet been filed by the police nor the final report sent by the police has been accepted by the concerned court. The above facts are important, they cannot be ignored. The main ground taken by the complainant in his complaint that the name of the complainant was removed during the investigation in the report lodged by the opposite party no. 1 and 2 and this fact is not final as the court below has not accepted any final report against the removal of the name of complainant.
5) The revisional court has also returned a finding that the complainant/petitioner is innocent in the present case has not yet been finally concluded by the Investigating Officer and unless the court, while accepting the final report so submitted, is of this opinion that the police investigation is correct and the case is false, until then it cannot be assumed that the complainant/petitioner has been defamed in any way by the registration of the FIR or the action taken in this regard.
6) I have gone through the findings recorded by the revisional court. I find that learned revisional Court has correctly set aside the summoning order and remanded the matter back to the lower Court for re-considering the matter. I find no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.
Order Date :- 12.5.2023
RavindraKSingh
