Allahabad High Court
Shanti Devi And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 July, 2024
Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:105752
Court No. - 74
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10754 of 2024
Applicant :- Shanti Devi And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Singh Dahiya
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Chandra Tiwari
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
1. Applicants before this Court are aggrieved by impugned order dated 19.01.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khurja, Bulandshahar under Section 204 Cr.P.C. whereby they have been summoned to face trial for offence under Section 420 IPC and relevant part of impugned order is quoted below :-
"???????? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ?????? ???????? ?????? ?? ???????? ????? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ??? ????? ??? ???? ???????? ???????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ????????? ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ??? ????? ??? ???? ???????? ?? ???? ??????? ?? ?? ?????? ?????? ???? ?????? ??, ?? ?? ????????? ??? ??, ???? ????????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ???????? ?? ?????? ?????? ????? ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ??? ???????????? ?????? ????? ?? ???? ???????? 13.07.2021 ?? ?????? ???????? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ? ???? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ??? ??? ????????/???? ?? ????????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??? ??? ??????? ???? ????? ???????? ???? ?? ???????? ??, ?????? ???? ??? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ????????? ?? ??? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ?? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ?? ???????? ???? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ?? 110 ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ?? 1982 ??? ??????? ?? ???? 113 ?? ??? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? ??? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ?????????? ?????, ???? ????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ??.?????. 1 ?????? ???? ?????? ???? 202 ??.???.??. ?? ????? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ???????? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?? ???, ???? ???? ???????? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ? ??????? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ? ???? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? ????? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ?????? ?????? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ??????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ??? ?????
????? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ??????? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ????????? ?????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?? ???????? ?????? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ???? ???? ????? ????, ????? ????, ?????? ?? ??????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ????? ??? ?? ??? ???? ??, "???? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ??? ????? ???? ???? ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ?? ???? ????? ???? ????? ??? ??, ?? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ??????? ???? ?? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ??, ???? ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ?? ???? 2021 ?? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ??? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??????? ???? ?? ?????? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??, ???? ????? ????, ????? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ??. ?????? ??????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? ?????? ??????? ???? ????????? ?? ??? ???? ???"
???????? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????? ?? ????????? ??? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ??? ????? ??? ???????? ?? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?? ????? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ??????? ???? ????? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ??? ?????????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????????/???? ?????? ??? ?????? ??.?????. 2 ?????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?????? 22.01.2018 ????? ?? ???? ?????? ??????? ?? ????????? ???????? 15.02.2018 ??? ??????? ???? ????? ???????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ??? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ????????? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ??? ??????? ?????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ????? ??? ??? ????????? ?????? ???? ??? ??? ???????? ?? ?????? ????????? ?? ???????? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ????????? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???????? ??????? ????? ???? ? ??? ???? ?? ???????? ???? 420 ??.??.??. ??? ???? ?? ???????? ???? ???"
2. Sri Rahul Singh Dahiya, learned counsel for applicants refers statement recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. that no offence is made out against applicants. Complainant has examined only relatives and interested witnesses and their statements may not be considered to be gospel truth.
3. Sri Ramesh Chandra Tiwari, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that at this stage, this Court has to scrutinize the impugned order whether trial Court has found that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against applicants or not and for that he also refers above referred order.
4. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused record.
5. Before considering rival submissions, this Court takes note of judgment of Supreme Court in Lalankumar Singh and others Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2022) SCC OnLine 1383.
6. At this stage, Court has to scrutinize whether impugned order is passed in terms of requisite requirement of Section 204 Cr.P.C. and whether there are sufficient grounds to proceed against applicant, which is supported by the statement of Secretary, Vikas Khand, Village Danpur that without any valid document, name of applicants are mentioned as wife of Dharmbir, without any document of marriage, whereas contrary to it, in family register and Voter ID, name of Shanti Devi is shown as wife of Sardar Singh.
7. In this regard, trial Court in its impugned order has not only considered the statement but has come up with specific reason that there are evidence against applicants for offence under Section 420 IPC and that there are sufficient material to proceed against them.
8. So far as other co-accused Jagdish is concerned, it was found that he was not involved, therefore, no summon was issued against him.
9. In aforesaid circumstances, since trial Court has assigned specific reasons in impugned order that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against applicants, therefore, I do not find any circumstance which warrants exercise of inherent powers of this Court.
10. Accordingly, application stands rejected.
Order Date :- 1.7.2024
N. Sinha
