Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 2]

Allahabad High Court

Amit Kumar Srivastava @ Pintu And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 August, 2019

Author: Sudhir Agarwal

Bench: Sudhir Agarwal





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

Court No. - 34
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6791 of 2002
 

 
Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava @ Pintu And Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- D.K. Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,D.K. Srivastava
 

 
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
 

1. Heard Sri D.P. Singh, Advocate for applicants and learned A.G.A. for State.

2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed praying for quashing of proceedings in Complaint Case No. 368 of 1998 (Sardari vs. Amit Kumar and others), under Sections 504, 506, 302, Police Station Tarya Sujan, District Kushinagar, pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar.

3. It is contended that a First Information Report was lodged against applicants but before police submit report, a complaint under Section 504, 506, 302 IPC was filed by respondent-complainant but subsequently police submitted charge sheet still Magistrate taken cognizance on complaint and has summoned applicants. It is submitted that in respect of same offence complaint as well as First Information Report cannot go together.

4. However, from record I find that police has submitted charge sheet under Section 304 IPC while complaint has been made under Section 504, 506, 302 IPC.

5. Learned counsel for applicants sought to rely on Section 210 Cr.P.C., which reads as under:

"210. Procedure to be followed when there is a complaint case and police investigation in respect of the same offence:-(1) When in a case instituted otherwise than on a police report (hereinafter referred to as a complaint case), it is made to appear to the Magistrate, during the course of the inquiry or trial held by him, that an investigation by the police is in progress in relation to the offence which is the subject- matter of the inquiry or trial held by him, the Magistrate shall stay the proceedings of such inquiry or trial and call for a report on the matter from the police officer conducting the investigation.
(2) If a report is made by the investigating police officer under section 173 and on such report cognizance of any offence is taken by the Magistrate against any person who is an accused in the complaint case, the Magistrate shall inquire into or try together the complaint case and the case arising out of the police report as if both the cases were instituted on a police report.
(3) If the police report does not relate to any accused in the complaint case or if the Magistrate does not take cognizance of any offence on the police report, he shall proceed with the inquiry or trial, which was stayed by him, in accordance with the provisions of this Code."

6. A perusal of Section 210 Cr.P.C. shows that when investigation by the police is in progress in relation to an offence which is subject matter of inquiry or trial held by him, the Magistrate shall stay the proceedings of such inquiry or trial and call for a report on the matter from the police officer conducting the investigation. Therefore, Section 210 Cr.P.C. talks of same offence and not the same incident. Here charge sheet was submitted under Section 304 IPC while in complaint Magistrate has summoned applicants under Section 504, 506, 302 IPC. Therefore, Section 210 Cr.P.C., in my view, has no application to present case.

7. Application is accordingly dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

Order Date :- 5.8.2019 AK