Allahabad High Court
Dayaram And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 14 December, 2022
Author: Rajiv Gupta
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33977 of 2022 Applicant :- Dayaram And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bharat Singh,Ram Babu Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 21.12. 2018 of complaint case no. 165 of 2017 (Panna Lal Vs. Daya Ram and others), under section 392, 354, 504, 506 I.P.C. P.S. Saurikh, District Kannauj, pending in the court of Special Judge, (D.A.A.)/third Additional Sessions Judge, Kannauj.
As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that on 28.8.2017 while the complainant was returning back on Bicycle alongwith his wife and minor daughter, the applicants intercepted the cycle and started hurling abuses and disrobed his wife and snatched her finger ring and a sum of Rs. 19,700/- and extended death threats to him by opening fire.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the present case has been instituted against the applicants as a counterblast to the complaint lodged by them.
Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, no offence is disclosed against the applicants and the present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment, as such, impugned summoning order be quashed.
Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, impugned summoning order cannot be quashed.
From the allegations made in the complaint and the statements of the witnesses recorded during the course of enquiry, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants.
At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283, the prayer for quashing the impugned summoning order is refused.
However, in case the applicants appear before the court below and apply for bail, their bail application be considered and disposed of in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773.
With the aforesaid observations, this application filed u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 14.12.2022 R