Allahabad High Court
Rohit Maisi And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 August, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ? Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:155046 Court No. - 35 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27931 of 2023 Applicant :- Rohit Maisi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, who are two in number and Sri Rajeev Pandey, learned A.G.A., who appears for the State-respondent and perused the material available on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.PC. has been filed by the applicants to quash the Complaint Case No. 9474 of 2022 (Kapil Kumar vs. Rohit Maisi and Others), as well as summoning order dated 25.01.2023, under Sections - 406, 504 I.P.C., Police Station - Katghar, District - Moradabad, pending before Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C./J.M.,Moradabad.
Leaned counsel for the applicants submits that the opposite party no.2, complainant had lodged a complaint against the applicants, who are two in number along with a third person, namely, Chandrasen with an allegation that the applicant no.2 had met the complainant and assured to arrange for a four wheeler of 2017 model. However, he took an advance of Rs.20,000/- and thereafter, when the same was verified by the complainant from the website OLX, then it was found that the same was of the year 2015. Thereafter, as per the complaint, the opposite party no.2 required payment of Rs.20,000/- given in advance, which on various pursuation was not returned and thus the complaint was filed against the applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the aforesaid allegations contained in the complaint are false and frivolous and have just been implanted to harass the applicants, as the opposite party no.2 happens to be a practicing advocate and the statements so recorded under Sections ? 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. are of his junior and the clients and the applicants have no concern, whatsoever, with the allegations implanted against them. He further submits that the entire proceedings need to be quashed by this Court, while exercising the jurisdiction.
Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that from perusal of the complaint itself, offences alleged against the applicants in the complaint are made out. However, whatever arguments the learned counsel for the applicants is raising before this Court is of factual nature, which cannot be gone into by this Court at this stage, particularly, while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Principally, the argument of the learned counsel for the applicants is in the form of a defence which he is seeking to raise that applicants are not involved in the alleged offence. Further this Court, at this stage, cannot delve upon the province, which is earmarked post commencement of the trial and this Court, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/S Neeharika, Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State Of Maharashtra and others, reported in AIR 2021 SC 192, cannot venture into factual scores. More so, learned counsel for the applicants has not pointed out any jurisdictional error in the impugned summoning order. Accordingly, this Court declines to interfere with the present proceedings of this case.
Thus, in view of above, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands consigned to record.
Order Date :- 2.8.2023 S Rawat