Back
2019 Supreme(All) 2201
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Ram Krishna Gautam, J.
Munni Devi And Others - Petitioners
Vs.
State of U.P. and Another - Respondents
Matters Under Article 227 No. - 9699 of 2019
Decided On : 19-12-2019
For the Petitioner: Shivajee Singh Sisodiya
For the Respondent: G.A., Kunwar Tejandra Bahadur
Proper consideration of evidence and adherence to legal procedures are essential in summoning orders related to criminal cases.
Headnote:
Article 227 - Criminal Revision - Indian Penal Code, Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 - The court discussed the misuse of the process of law, fraudulent mutation of land, and the requirement of proper evidence for summoning orders.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants sought to set aside summoning orders related to a criminal case under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. The court analyzed the allegations of fraudulent land mutation and the failure to appreciate facts and law by the lower courts.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the lower courts failed to properly consider the evidence and law, leading to erroneous summoning orders. It emphasized the need for proper evidence and legal procedures in such cases.
Issues: The main issues were the fraudulent mutation of land, misuse of the process of law, and the failure of the lower courts to appreciate facts and law.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the failure of the lower courts to properly consider the evidence and law, leading to erroneous summoning orders. It emphasized the need for proper evidence and legal procedures in such cases.
Final Decision: The court set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the Magistrate for reevaluation, emphasizing the need for proper consideration of evidence and legal procedures.
JUDGMENT :
1. This proceeding, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by Munni Devi and three others, with a prayer for setting aside order, dated 23.11.2019, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.15, Bareilly, in Criminal Revision No. 140 of 2019/C.N.R. No. UPBRO 1-004303-2019 (Munni Devi & others vs. State of U.P. and another) as well as order, dated 26.2.2019, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Bareilly, in Complaint Case No. 3207 of 2018 (Chheda Lal Vs. Munni Devi & others), under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station-Fatehganj Paschimi, District Bareilly.
2. Learned counsel for applicants argued that a case crime number was got registered upon a report of Chheda Lal, after lapse of 22 years, as Case Crime No. 482 of 2012, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station-Fatehganj Paschimi, District-Bareilly, wherein, investigation resulted in submission of final report. Thenafter, a protest petition was filed, wherein, Magistrate took cognizance, examined complainant and his two witnesses, under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, complaint was dismissed, under Section 203 of Cr.P.C.
3. Against this order of the Magistrate, a criminal revision was filed, wherein, revisional court set aside order, dated 9.11.2017 of the Magistrate, thereby, allowed criminal revision and remanded back matter for fresh adjudication over protest petition.
4. In compliance whereof, Magistrate passed impugned order of summoning, wherein, applicants, Munni Devi, Ram Murti, Shiv Mangal, Indresh and Naqi Raza Khan, have been summoned for offences, punishable, under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 of IPC. Both of these courts have failed to appreciate facts and law placed before them and have committed misuse of process of law. Hence, invoking jurisdiction of this Court of general superintendence over subordinate courts, as conferred upon it by Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this Application has been filed, with above prayer.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of Opposite party no.2, argued that sale of Arazi No. 489 was made by way of a registered deed, in favour of Munni Devi, but, under connivance with Area Lekhpal, Naki Raza Khan, mutation was got made, with respect of Arazi No.472, which was adjacent to road and possession was taken over it. On protest being made, accused-persons, abused and extended threat of dire consequences. Hence, an application was moved and a civil suit was also filed, wherein, there is an order in favour of Opposite parties and learned Additional Sessions Judge has rightly appreciated facts and law, thereby, allowed criminal revision, remanded back the matter for consideration by the Magistrate, whereupon, impugned summoning order has been passed. Hence, this Application is liable to be dismissed.
6. Learned AGA, representing State of Uttar Pradesh, has also vehemently opposed this Application.
7. Heard learned counsel for both sides and gone through materials on record.
8. From very perusal of the first information report, complaint, filed by way of protest petition and statements of complainant, recorded, under Sections 200 of Cr.P.C., as well as, under Section 202 of Cr.P.C. of witnesses, it is apparent that the allegations levelled by the complainant was that he had sold land of Gata No. 489 of Village- Tithariya Khetal, by way of a registered deed, dated 22.10.1990, in favour of Munni Devi and it was mutated in the revenue record on 23.1.1996. Arazi No. 489 is away from highway, whereas, Arazi No. 472 is adjacent to highway and complainant was residing at Haldwani. Hence, taking advantage of it, Munni Devi, under connivance of area Lekhpal, Naqi Raza Khan, got mutated her name for Arazi No.472, instead of, Arazi No.489 and, thereby, she got possession over it. Thereafter, construction was raised over it. Hence, it was done by committing fraud and manuf
