Allahabad High Court
Maan Narayan vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 10 May, 2024
Author: Shamim Ahmed
Bench: Shamim Ahmed
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:37351
Court No. - 27
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4725 of 2016
Applicant :- Maan Narayan
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Ors.
Counsel for Applicant :- Farhan Alam Osmany,Bhagwati Prasad Nigam
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Avikshit Mishra,Sandeep Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
Heard Sri Farhan Alam Osmany, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Ajay Kumar Agnihotri, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the order dated 06.07.2016 passed by the Court of Additional Session Judge/Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Hardoi in Criminal Revision No. 185/2015: Maan Narayan Vs. State of U.P. and others and the impugned order dated 04.07.2015 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi in Case No. 807/2015 under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that there is enmity of the applicant' brother, namely, Jeet Narayan with the opposite party Nos. 2 to 7 and in a dowry death case he had to recorded statement before the Court. On 22.05.2015 at 8.00 p.m. the applicant's brother went for natural call, but did not return and on 23.05.2015 the applicant moved a Gumsudhi Report regarding missing of his brother. The applicant wants to lodge the F.I.R. of this said incident, but when the concerned Police has not lodged F.I.R. then on 06.06.2015 moved an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. before the Court of C.J.M. Hardoi against the opposite party Nos. 2 to 7 with the allegation that the brother of the complainant was murdered by the opposite parties and police has nothing done.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the learned Magistrate vide order dated 04.07.2015 rejected the application moved under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that against the order dated 04.07.2015 the applicant preferred a revision bearing Criminal Revision No. 185/2015: Maan Narayan Vs. State of U.P. and others and the revisional court i.e. Additional Session Judge/Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Hardoi rejected the revision of the applicant vide order dated 06.07.2016 with the finding that in this case one F.I.R. has already been lodged.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the order dated 06.07.2016 passed by the Court of Additional Session Judge/Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Hardoi and the order dated 04.07.2015 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi are bad in the eye of law.
Per contra, the learned AGA for the State submits that the learned Magistrate has rightly rejected the application filed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. vide order dated 04.07.2015 and the revisional court also by a detailed order dated 06.07.2016 rejected the revision giving reference to the Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgment 2011 (72) ACC 302 (SC) Chirra Shivraj Vs. State of A.P. that for the same incident two cases cannot be lodged, whereas it is an admitted fact that a Gumsudgi report has already been lodged by the applicant before the concerned Police Station and after police report it was found that the brother of the applicant has committed suicide by hanging himself on a tree and as per post-mortem report the cause of death is Asphyxia, thus the application filed by the applicant for lodging of the F.I.R. under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. in respect of the same incident, is nothing but an abuse of process of law and the learned Magistrate has rightly rejected the application and the revisional court has also considered all the facts and circumstances of the case by a detailed order rejected the revision, thus no interference is required by this Court and the present application devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.
After considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the impugned orders dated 04.07.2015 and 06.07.2016 passed by the court below and revisional court, I do not find any illegality and infirmity in the impugned orders. The learned Magistrate has rightly rejected the application filed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. vide order dated 04.07.2015 and the revisional court also by a detailed order dated 06.07.2016 rejected the revision giving reference to the Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgment 2011 (72) ACC 302 (SC) Chirra Shivraj Vs. State of A.P. that for the same incident two cases cannot be lodged, whereas it is an admitted fact that a Gumsudgi report has already been lodged by the applicant before the concerned Police Station, thus the application filed by the applicant for lodging of the F.I.R. under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. in respect of the same incident, is nothing but an abuse of process of law and the learned Magistrate has rightly rejected the application and the revisional court has rightly rejected the revision, thus no interference is required by this Court and the present application devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, this application lacks merit and dismissed.
Order Date :- 10.5.2024
Arvind
