Allahabad High Court
Rakesh Kumar vs State Of Up And 3 Others on 18 November, 2024
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:180459
Court No. - 85
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 12265 of 2024
Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Raghuvansh Chandra,Ram Jee Saxena
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Sri Raghuvansh Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The factual matrix of the matter derives that petitioner being the informant preferred an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. vide order dated 18.08.2022.
3. Petitioner being aggrieved with the direction passed by learned court of Judicial Magistrate/Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Court No. 5, Meerut for registering the case as a complaint case preferred criminal revision with specific grounds that the offence committed by private respondents attracts section 380 IPC and the same can only be determined during trial, if the investigation has to be carried out by way of recovery of certain stolen articles and the same is not possible during the complaint case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that without considering these grounds learned Additional Session Judge/FTC, Court No. 1, Meerut dismissed the revision on dated 03.06.2024 preferred at the behest of petitioner by way of up holding the order dated 18.08.2022.
5. For substantiating the argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and grounds taken up while preferring criminal revision relied upon judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Suresh Chand Jain Vs. State of M.P., 2001(1) RCR (Criminal) 335 (SC) : 2001(1) ACrR 586 (SC) : JT 2001(2) SC 81 which is fallowed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Gulab Chand Upadhyaya Vs. State of U.P. wherein it has been held that where the complainant is in possession of the complete details of all the accused as well as the witness who have to be examined and neither recovery is needed nor any specific evidence is required to be collected which can be done only by the police, no "investigation" would normally be required and the procedure of complaint case should be adopted, but the incident took place in the house and in presence of complainant all the accused with their names and address are known to the complainant, the witness of the incident are also known to him, although it was stated that purpose for launching a successful prosecution of the accused evidence is required, in the instant matter evidence in shape of stolen property has to be recovered only by way of conducting the proper investigation and the same cannot be determined and ascertainment, while considering the statement recorded by the complainant and the witnesses and as such specifically in the instant matter learned Magistrate was to direct the concerned authority to register the case and then conduct the thorough investigation.
6. Argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioner seems to be justified, since the matter pertains to legal question and as such process of issuing notice to the respondent nos. 2 to 4 is hereby dispensed with. Both the orders dated 18.08.2022 and 03.06.2024 passed by Judicial Magistrate/Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Court No. 5, Meerut and learned Additional Session Judge/FTC, Court No. 1, Meerut respectively are hereby set aside. Matter is remitted back to the learned court concerned for deciding application preferred at the behest of petitioner under section 156(3) Cr.P.C as fresh by way of considering the above mentioned discussion specifically sections which attracted the offence committed and alleged by the petitioner against the private respondents.
7. The writ petition stands allowed.
Order Date :- 18.11.2024
Vikram
