The power under section 482 Cr.PC should be sparingly exercised to prevent abuse of the process of court or to secure the ends of justice.

JUDGMENT :

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.

Heard Shri I.K. Chaturvedi, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Ganga Bhushan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Pratap Kanchan Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. This application has been filed under section 482 Cr.PC seeking quashing of summoning order dated 29.03.2019 passed in Criminal Complaint No. 2320 of 2018 (Tika Ram Vs. Krashna Kant and others), by learned CJM, Jhansi, under section 147, 148, 302, 352 IPC, P.S. Lahchura, District Jhansi as well as entire proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case including the order dated 21.07.2018, passed by learned CJM, Jhansi, whereby the learned Magistrate after rejecting the final report submitted in the case crime No. 0056 of 2018, under section, 147, 148, 302, 352 IPC, P.S. Lahchura, District Jhansi, treated the Protest Petition of the opposite party no. 2 as a complaint.

3. According to the FIR, the alleged incident took place on 9/10.04.2018 at about 1 a.m. in the night and opposite party no. 2 lodged FIR which was registered as crime no. 0056 of 2018, under sections 147, 148, 302, 352 IPC. In the FIR it was alleged that opposite party no. 2 and his wife with his son Lal Singh were present at their agricultural field for crop harvesting in the night, thereafter, Lal Singh proceeded to his house and when he arrived near his house at about 1 a.m., suddenly the named accused persons who were armed with Lathi and country made pistol, made an assault upon him. Upon hearing his voice, younger son Ram Kumar and his wife and wife of Lal Singh came out side the door and saw that the accused persons were armed with lathi and country made pistol and after challenging the accused persons, they escaped from the spot, after committing scuffle with his son. Thereafter, his son Ram Kumar picked up Lal Singh and informed him. The police was called and thereafter he came to police station with injured son on Maruti van. The police took his injured son to hospital at Mauranipur from where he was referred to District Hospital, Jhansi. On the way his son expired in the vicinity of the village Sakrak. It was further alleged in the FIR that there was old enmity going on with the accused and that is why his son was murdered by them. The matter was investigated by police and after concluding investigation a final report dated 17.04.2018 was submitted to the court, in which it was also requested that a proceedings should be initiated under section 182 IPC against the informant.

4. Aggrieved by the final report opposite party no. 2 filed protest petition on 14.05.2018 on which the court passed an order on 21.07.2018, rejecting the final report and directing to register the protest petition of informant as complaint and complainant was directed to produce the witnesses. Thereafter the statement under section 200 Cr.PC of the informant and the statement of the witnesses under section 202 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the court and passed the impugned summoning order.

5. Aggrieved by the summoning order, this application has been filed, submitting that the impugned order was passed ignoring the police papers on record and only relying on the witnesses examined in support of the complaint. It is clear that the injuries found on the body of the deceased was on one side of his body. The impugned order has been passed on the ocular account of C.W.-1 and C.W.-3, but they have not stated that they have seen the accused persons committing scuffle. The applicants has been summoned without assigning the reason and no specific role has been assigned to any of the applicants and only on the general allegations, the impugned order was passed.

6. It has been further alleged that the Investigating Officer had indicated that the death of the deceased occurred as he fell from the roof and the injury report of the deceased also indicated same thing The fact alleged and discovered during investigation, creates serious doubt about the occu