Sunil Kumar ( In Complaint Sunil @ Soni) vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 3128 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Sunil Kumar ( In Complaint Sunil @ Soni) vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. ... on 5 February, 2024

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:10595
 
Court No. - 27
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 959 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Sunil Kumar ( In Complaint Sunil @ Soni)
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramakar Shukla
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Ramakar Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Verma, the learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record.

2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has sought quashing of impugned summoning order dated 31.03.2023 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 35, Sultanpur in Complaint Case No. 3158/2022 "Bhag Dei v. Sunil & Ors." under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452 IPC, Police Station Bazar Shukul, District Amethi and the judgment and order dated 04.01.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sultanpur in Crl. Revision No. 236/2023 "Sunil Kumar alias Soni & Ors. v. Smt. Bhag Dei & Anr".

3. Sri Ramakar Shukla has stated that the criminal prosecution has been initiated maliciously because of an old animosity as the applicant's brother had previously filed an FIR bearing Case Crime No. 76 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 504 & 506 IPC. He has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC (Crl) 426 and he has submitted that the present case is covered in category 7.

4. Sri Anurag Verma, the learned AGA-I has opposed the application and he has submitted that in Ramveer Upadhyay & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Anr. 2022 SCC OnLine SC 484, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that:-

###

5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.B.I. v. Aryan Singh, 2023 SCC Online SC 379 has held that while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court is not required to conduct a mini trial. It does not require the prosecution/investigating agency to prove the allegations. While exercising the powers under Section 482 of the CrPC the Court has very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider "whether any sufficient material available to proceed further against the accused for which the accused is required to be tried or not".

6. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the plea raised by the applicant that the proceedings have been instituted maliciously, needs some factual inquiry, which cannot be done by this Court while deciding application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the same is tobe done by the trial court after the parties are given opportunity to lead evidence in support of their respective pleas.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

Order Date :- 5.2.2024

Pradeep/-