Allahabad High Court
Chaandveer Singh vs State Of U.P. on 11 December, 2019
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 45552 of 2019 Applicant :- Chaandveer Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Akhilesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as perused the material available on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the order dated 19th October, 2019 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal at Chandausi in Case No. 2355 of 2019 (State Vs. Praveen Solanki & Another), under Section 219 I.P.C., Police Station-Gunnaur, District-Sambhal.
Under the order impugned, the applicant has been summoned under Section 219 I.P.C. by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal at Chandaushi.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is presently posted as Sub-Inspector, Kotwali Gunnaur, District-Sambhal. The applicant discharge his duties diligently and there has been no complaint whatsoever against the applicant by anyone. It is further submitted that in Criminal Appeal No. 1252 of 2015 (Jodha Vs. State) pending before the High Court, an order was sent by the High Court to enquire and send the report regarding the fact as to whether the appellant Jodha is dead or alive. In pursuance of the said order, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal passed an order dated 25th September, 2019 requiring the Inspector, Kotwali Sambhal to submit the report about the aforesaid fact. Pursuant to the said order, the applicant was deputed on 16th October, 2019 to enquire whether the appellant is dead of alive and to submit the report. The applicant thereafter went to the house of appellant Jodha but Jodha was not present, then the applicant served the notice to Raghuveer i.e. father of Jodha, who received the notice. The applicant thereafter meet the Gram Pradhan, who informed him that appellant Jodha is alive and is working as labour in Delhi and in that regard the Gram Pradhan has also issued a certificate. The applicant submitted the report in pursuance of the notice dated 16th October, 2019 to Inspector, Gunnaur stating therein that the accused/appellant Jodha son of Ravhuveer is alive and at present is working as labour in Delhi and also annexed the certificate issued by the Gram Pradhan. The report along with the certificate and notice have been submitted before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal. It is then submitted that it appears the appellant Jodha on information received from his father appeared before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal on 18th October, 2019 and gave an undertaking an personal bond standing that he would be present before the High Court. However, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal, for the reasons best known to him, passed an order dated 19th October, 2019, recording a finding that the appellant has submitted the report dated 16th October, 2019 in a corrupt manner stating that appellant Jodha is alive and at present is working at Delhi as labour and has annexed the certificate issued by the Gram Pradhan. However, the appellant Jodha appeared in Court and has given an undertaking and personal bond that he would present himself in the High Court. In pursuance of the order dated 19th October, 2019 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal, a case was registered against the applicant being Case No. 2355 of 2019, under Section 219 I.P.C., Police Statition Gannaur, District-Sambhal. It is against this order that the present application has been filed. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that the applicant has been granted bail in the said case. It is further submitted that the applicant has submitted correct report and he has not attended by any corrupt practice or maliciously. No offence under Section 219 I.P.C is made out against the applicant and the finding recorded by the Chief Judicial Magistrate in respect of corrupt practice is perverse. Therefore, the same is liable to be set aside.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant by submitting that the impugned order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate is based on correct finding of fact and prima facie he has strong suspicion to initiate proceedings under Section 219 I.P.C. against the applicant. Therefore, the impugned order is not liable to be set aside.
I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as have gone through the records of the present application along with the impugned order.
From the order impugned, it is apparently clear that in pursuance of the order of the High Court passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1252 of 2015 (Jodha Vs. State), the Chief Judicial Magistrate has passed an order dated 25th September, 2019/16th October, 2019 requiring the Inspector concerned to submit report as to whether the appellant Jodha is alive or not. In pursuance of the same, the applicant has been deputed to submit the said report. However, from the record, it is apparent that the applicant has not acted diligently and has submitted a wrong report regarding the appellant is at present Delhi only on the basis of certificate issued by the Gram Pradhan. He has not acted properly. The Chief Judicial Magistrate has rightly passed the impugned order initiating proceedings under Section 219 I.P.C. against the applicant. There is no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
The present applicant lacks merit and is accordingly rejected.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 11.12.2019 Sushil/-