Ashok vs State Of U.P. And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 19726 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Ashok vs State Of U.P. And Another on 29 May, 2024

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:98641
 
Court No. - 89
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7116 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Ashok
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Swetashwa Agarwal,Yash Raj Verma
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
 

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

Present application u/s 482 of Cr PC has been filed by the applicant, praying for quashing the entire proceedings arising out of Complaint Case No.2528/IX/2020- Smt. Soniya Agarwal vs. Ashok and Another, under Section 354B of IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Mathura along with impugned summoning order dated 28.6.2022 passed by the Civil Judge (JD)/FTC (Crime Against Woman) Judicial Magistrate, Mathura, whereby the applicant is being summoned to face trial for the offence u/s 354B of IPC, as well as the impugned order dated 31.5.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/FTC (Crime Against Woman), Mathura, whereby the Criminal Revision so preferred by the applicant has been rejected.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the version of the complaint, the alleged incident took place in a temple on 29/30.9.2017, where about 300 persons were present. In the enquiry conducted under Section 202 (1) of the Cr PC, it was reported by the police that no such incident took place and on the basis of such report, the complaint filed by opposite party no.2 was rejected under Section 203 of Cr PC. Against it, opposite party on.2 preferred a revision, which was allowed and the learned Magistrate, without recording any reason, summoned the applicant in cursory manner. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned summoning order, the applicant also preferred a revision, which was dismissed, vide impugned order dated 31.5.2023.

It is further submitted that present is a case of no injury. Though according to the complainant, the alleged incident took place on 29/30.9.2017, but the application under Section 156 (3) of Cr PC was filed on 30.11.2017, after about two months. Ingredients of Section 354B of IPC are not made out against the applicant.

In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Lalankumar Singh & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 833.

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer and submitted that the impugned summoning order has been passed on the basis of primary evidence available on record and there is no infirmity in the same.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and after going through the material available on record, the prayer made by the applicant, is refused.

However, it is provided that in case the applicant applies for bail within a period of 30 days from today, his application for bail shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825.

For a period of 30 days from today or till the applicant surrenders and applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

Present application is, accordingly, disposed of.

Order Date :- 29.5.2024

RKK/-