Allahabad High Court
Sudhir Kumar Alias Sudhir Singh Chauhan ... vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 14 January, 2020
Author: Ram Krishna Gautam
Bench: Ram Krishna Gautam
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 77 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 8242 of 2019 Petitioner :- Sudhir Kumar Alias Sudhir Singh Chauhan And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhir Singh Chauhan,Ashutosh Vishwakarma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by Sudhir Kumar alias Sudhir Singh Chauhan and Shailendra Singh with a prayer for setting aside impugned order dated 25.06.2019, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Farrukhabad in Criminal Misc. Application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., registered as Misc. Case No. 1389/11/18 (Sudhir Singh Chauhan Vs. Bhanu Prakash, Police Sub Inspector and others) with a further direction for registration and investigation of above case as case crime number.
Learned counsel for petitioner argued that he had given an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. wherein name of accused Bhanu Prakash and two other Constables were given, but name of two Constables were not under knowledge of petitioner. They did this abuse and assault inside Police Station. Subsequently, a false case was got registered under connivance with one of accused against whom Case Crime No. 552 of 2017 was under investigation and this was got registered upon report of petitioner. Hence, there required registration and investigation as case crime number, but Magistrate in utter defiance of law of Constitution Bench given in Gulab Chand Upadhyaya Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh; 2002 Law Suit (All) 243 as well asLalita Kumar Vs. Government of U.P. and others, 2013 LawSuit (SC) 1030, passed impugned order, wherein application was treated as a complaint case and date of recording statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C. was fixed. It was abuse of process of law and failure of exercise, hence under General Superintendence of this Court over Subordinate Courts under Articles 227 of the Constitution of India, this proceeding with above prayer.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed aforesaid prayer.
From the very perusal of judgments cited, as above, it is apparent that pith and substance of both the precedents is that if the circumstances and facts, involved in a particular case, is of this nature, which required no investigation, then Magistrate may exercise its jurisdiction for taking cognizance by itself and proceed under Chapter XV of Cr.P.C. as a complaint case, otherwise if some investigation is needed then order for registration and investigation by Station Officer concerned, without taking cognizance, may be passed i.e. it is not mandatory that in each and every application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., Magistrate is bound to direct for registration and investigation of case crime number.
Division Bench of this Court in Ram Babu Gupta vs. State of U.P. and Ors.; 2001 (43) A.C.C. 50, and Sukhwasi Versus State of Uttar Pradesh; 2007 (59) A.C.C. 739 and apex court in Suresh Chandra Jain Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another; 2001 (42) A.C.C. 459 and Aleque Padamsee and others Vs. Union of India and others; (2007) 6 Supreme Court Cases 171, has propounded that Magistrate is well within jurisdiction to take cognizance and proceed as a complaint under Chapter XV Cr.P.C. over an application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Facts involved in present case is that petitioner, a practising lawyer at High Court, Allahabad, had lodged a Case Crime No. 552 of 2017, under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 471 I.P.C., at P.S. Maudarwaja. This was for investigation by Sub Inspector Bhanu Prakash. A direction by telephone, on the basis of convenience, was there that during winter vacation informant will be there along with his witnesses for recording of statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and in winter vacation, petitioner along with his brother went at above police out-post for getting statement recorded, where Sub Inspector asked for presence of other witnesses too. This was protested and some scuffle occurred, whereupon it was said that abuse and assault was made. A case was challaned against Sudhir Kumar Alias Sudhir Singh Chauhan side. This was said to be under connivance with accused persons. Now for this, application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved. Meaning thereby, each and every sequence was in performance of official duty by Sub Inspector of Police, who was working as Investigating Officer. The sequence of offence, name of accused persons, time and place of accusation, all were under knowledge of petitioner. Under above facts and circumstances, Magistrate opined that there need not to be any inquiry in the matter in question. Accordingly, he took cognizance and decided to proceed as a complaint case under Chapter XV of Cr.P.C.. This was well within jurisdiction of Magistrate and in accordance with law, mentioned as above. This Court in exercise of power of Superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to see as to whether subordinate courts are not working in accordance with legal precedents and in case in hand there is no infirmity, requiring any indulgence of this Court. Accordingly, this petition merits its dismissal.
The petition is dismissed as such.
Order Date :- 14.1.2020/NS While hearing at Serial No. 19 in revised list, counsel claiming himself to be a counsel of this Court and who was a client and party in person and argued at serial no. 1 in revised list, started arguing that judicial philosophy of a Judge presiding in a Court is not to prevail. Rather, Constitution of India and provisions written therein is to prevail. The threatening or warning of Court is not accepted, as was being said that please be silent and keep bearing.
This Court after hearing in detail has passed order today in fresh application at serial no. 1 and if Sri Sudhir Kumar Alias Sudhir Singh Chauhan, who had argued in person in above case is aggrieved, he may prefer a judicial proceeding before appropriate forum. This Court is never expected to explain its order passed in judicial side after hearing parties. His conduct is highly objectionable.
Let a notice be issued to Sri Sudhir Kumar Alias Sudhir Singh Chauhan, as to why this be not taken as contempt of this Court under Article 215 of the Constitution of India.
Let this explanation be filed by Sri Sudhir Kumar Alias Sudhir Singh Chauhan in post lunch session on today itself. He is present in Court. He is taking notice of this order.
In post lunch session, Sri Rakesh Pandey, President, Bar Association, expressed regret for the conduct of Sri Sudhir Kumar @ Sudhir Singh Chauhan. Sri Sudhir Kumar @ Sudhir Singh Chauhan, Advocate, is also regretting for his conduct, for which this proceeding was initiated.
As Sri Sudhir Kumar @ Sudhir Singh Chauhan himself is a party / client of this case and he had argued in his personal capacity, though no permission for the same was taken, but Court heard him and passed order. Hence it appears that under above anxiety of being client, he conducted so.
Accordingly, this proceeding is being dropped with this observation that Sri Sudhir Kumar @ Sudhir Singh Chauhan should be careful and not to merge his personality as an Advocate with a personality as a client in future.
Order Date :- 14.1.2020/NS