Allahabad High Court
Arun Kumar And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 November, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:210452
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21391 of 2024
Arun Kumar And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Mukesh Joshi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
Anil Kumar Dubey, G.A.
Court No. - 82
HON'BLE PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J.
1. Heard Shri Mukesh Joshi, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Akash Kumar Sharma, learned Advocate, holding brief of Shri Anil Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he has filed the present application under Section 482 CrPC for the following prayer, which has been mentioned in the prayer clause of this application. The prayer clause is delineated below:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash the summoning order dated 13.07.2023 as well as non-bailable warrant dated 29.02.2024 and entire proceeding of criminal case no. 2292 of 2015 Under (State Vs. Arun Kumar and others), Section 323, 504 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali, District Pilibhit, arising out of N.C.R No. 86 of 2017, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) FTC/W.P./Judicial Magistrate, Pilibhit."
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in this case, a non-cognizable report was registered under Section 323, 504 IPC, and after investigation, the police have submitted charge-sheet in the same Sections and the learned Magistrate took cognizance under Section 190(1)(b) CrPC and summoned the applicants treating it as a State case or case instituted on police report. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the applicants have challenged the cognizance-cum-summoning order before this Court by means of Application u/s 482 No. 29954 of 2018 (Arun Kumar and 3 others v. State of UP And Anr.) and this Court, vide order dated 06.09.2018, quashed the cognizance-cum-summoning order and remitted the matter to the concerned trial court to treat the case as a "complaint" taking cognizance under Section 190(1)(a) CrPC.
4. In compliance of the aforesaid order of this Court, the trial court/ Judicial Magistrate took cognizance under Section 190(1)(a) CrPC and proceeded the matter as a trial of summon cases instituted on complaint as both the cases are of non-cognizable offence and punishment is upto two years. As per Section 320 CrPC, both the offences are compoundable by the parties and as per Section 257 CrPC, the complainant may withdraw the case or in case, the complainant is absent on the next date fixed by the trial court concerned and he is not turning up after 30 days, the accused may be acquitted by the trial court as per Section 256 CrPC. Therefore, the remedy was available for the applicants before the trial court as per Sections 320, 256 and 257 CrPC.
5. Thus, the application under Section 482 CrPC is only abuse of the process of law and remedy is still available for the accused as well as for the informant in case of trial of summon cases instituted on complaint as in this case police report has already been treated as a complaint and the remedy is available under Section 256 CrPC as well as under Section 257 CrPC.
6. Accordingly, this application under Section 482 CrPC is dismissed and there is no need to decide the case on the basis of compromise application as this Court has already flooded with the applications under Section 482 CrPC.
7. The trial court concerned is directed to decide the pending case in accordance with provision of Sections 320, 256, 257 CrPC, as per the stage of the case.
(Praveen Kumar Giri,J.) November 24, 2025 Rama Kant