A single judge bench of Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma of Uttarakhand HC dismissed the petition under Section 482 CrPC filed against the summoning order in the Complaint Case.
The Court held that the provisions of Section 499 which is to be read with explanation IV requires consideration of making deliberation on the merits of the act complaint of, and evidence, due to that it would be exclusively falling within the domain of the learned trial Court and not open to be scrutinized under Section 482 of CrPC.
Facts:
A Criminal Case No. 3953 of 2017, was instituted before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, district Udham Singh Nagar, for trying the present applicants for their alleged involvement in commission of offence under Section 452, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC. During its pendency, the applicants had filed an application under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking discharge. The said application was considered by the Court of Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kashipur district Udham Singh Nagar, and the same had been rejected by an order dated 18th May 2022. And it is during the pendency of the proceedings that the respondent is said to have instituted a complaint proceeding under Section 500 of IPC. The learned trial Court, after recording the statement under Section 200 and 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, had taken cognizance on the same.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that they were the propriety of the Application itself, which had been filed by the respondent, by way of a Complaint Case No. 5007 of 2022, alleging it to be that the act alleged falls under Section 500 of IPC, rather it would fall within an exception given in Explanation 4 to Section 499 of IPC. In that eventuality, he submitted that when an act complained of under Section 500 of IPC, falls under an exception of Explanation 4 to Section 499, no cognizance in the complaint case could be taken by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.
Observations of the Court
This Court observed that during the course of argument, what was reflected that he himself was not very sure, that after issuance of summoning order, whether the charge has been framed or not. In fact, the literal sense, the provisions of Section 499 which is to be read with explanation IV, requires a deliberation of facts and evidence, because in order to satisfy the parameters of exemption as to whether an act complaint of in an act of defamation within itself or not, would be a subject matter, which could be established by evidence, which the parties may lead to the proceedings of the complaint case and the interpretation, which had been sought to be attracted by the learned counsel for the applicants by invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, may not be a subject matter, which could be left open to be scrutinized under Section 482 of CrPC. Whenever any criminal cases requires a deliberation on merits and evidence that would be exclusively falls within the domain of the learned trial Court.
The bearing of non-challenge of an order dated 18th May 2022, by the petitioner, is still a matter to be scrutinized by the Court, but so far as the summoning order was concerned, the summoning order in the complaint case did took cognizance of an effect of rejection of an application for discharge in Criminal Case No. 3953 of 2017, as rendered on 18th May 2022. In that eventuality, where the discharge was also on the basis of the explanation 4 to Section 499, the summoning order dated 17th October 2022, in a complaint case, which now stands instituted under Section 500 of CrPC, cannot be faulted of in any manner, whatsoever.
Decision:
The present petition under C482 against the summoning order in the Complaint Case was dismissed being devoid of any merit.
Case: Mohan Chandra Aggarwal and Others vs Jai Nandan Agarwal
Citation: Criminal Misc. Application No. 2075 of 2022
Coram: Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma
Dated: 23.11.2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com:
Picture Source :
