Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
Praveen Singh And 3 Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Respondents
Application U/s 482 No.8755 of 2022
Decided on : 02-12-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 326, 307, 323, 324, 504, 506, 120B, 386 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 156(3), 482, 161, 397, 152, 151 – Entire proceedings of F.R. Case – Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means – Criminal Case – Attempt to murder – Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt – Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means – Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace – Punishment for criminal intimidation – Criminal conspiracy – Extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt – Examination of witnesses by police – For the dispute between parties, an FIR was lodged by opposite party no.2 through an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved present case was presented and came up before Court for argument for first time – Held, Court of initially agreeing to amicably settle disputes, later changing his stand, exerting pressure upon Court to decide matter finally and also approaching Hon'ble Apex Court without waiting for final decision in matter and where circumstances go to show that FIR has been lodged for settling monetary dispute, Court finds it to be a fit case for exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Keeping in mind that criminal prosecution is a serious matter; it affects liberty of a person, no greater damage can be done to reputation of a person than dragging him in a criminal case, continuance of prosecution would be nothing but an abuse of process of law and will be a mental trauma to the applicants, it becomes necessary for Court to invoke inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in present facts and circumstances of his case – Therefore, in view of above discussion, this Court finds a good ground for quashing impugned summoning order as well as entire proceedings of aforesaid case – Allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Nipun Singh and Mr. Vivek Chaubey, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Rajiv Nanda, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Manish Kumar Vikkey, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Yadav and Mr. Amit Rai, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA for the State and perused the records.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 07.03.2022 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, District-Bijnor as well as the entire proceedings of F.R. Case No.63/2021 (Misc. Case No.87/2022) (Pramod Kumar Baliyan vs. Praveen Singh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.419/2021, under Sections 326, 307, 323, 324, 504, 506, 120B IPC, Police Station-Haldaur, District-Bijnor, pending before the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, District-Bijnor.
3. For the dispute between the parties, an FIR was lodged by the opposite party no.2 through an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved on 22nd November, 2022. The present case was presented on 26th March, 2022 and came up before the Court for argument for the first time on 20th April, 2022. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, after hearing the matter at length passed the following order on 20th April, 2022:-
In view of submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, matter requires consideration.
Opposite party no.2 may file counter affidavit within one week. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter.
Put up this case on 10.05.2022 as fresh.”
4. On the next date, i.e. 08.07.2022, as the parties were ready to amicably settle the dispute, therefore, the following order was passed:-
5. On 18th July, 2022, the case was adjourned on the request of learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, therefore, the following order was passed:-
As prayed, put up as fresh on 25.07.2022 at 2:00 PM.
Interim order, if any, is extended till the next date of listing.”
6. On 25th July, 2022, the applicant nos.1, 2 and 4 as well as opposite party no.2 were present and after hearing their respective counsels, the following order was passed in their presence:-
Today, Mr. Pramod Kumar Baliyan, opposite party no.2 is present before this Court. Applicant no.1 Praveen Singh, applicant no.2 Virendra Singh and applicant no.4 Jubair are also present before this Court and have been identified by their respective counsels.
Learned counsels for the parties state that the parties are ready to settle the dispute amicably, therefore, the matter may be posted for 3rd of August, 2022.
Put up this matter as fresh on 03.08.2022 at 2:00 PM in Chamber.
The applicants as well as opposite party no.2 shall be present before this Court on the next date i.e. 03.08.2022.
The applicant nos.1, 2 and 4 will inform about this order to applicant no.3 that he has to be present before this Court on the next date fixed.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in Case Crime No.419 of 2021, und
The evidence produced by the accused in his defense cannot be looked into by the court at the pre-trial stage. The court's power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings is to prevent ....
The court has the inherent power to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice, and criminal proceedings should not be permitted to continue if the dispute is purely civil in nature and ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a prima facie case to be made out against the accused and the limitations on the court's power to appreciate evidence at the pr....
The court emphasized that allegations lacking evidence do not justify the summoning of accused, highlighting the necessity of due diligence by the Magistrate under Section 482 of the CrPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court can quash criminal proceedings if they are manifestly attended with mala fides and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive fo....
(1) If a prima facie case is made out disclosing ingredients of offence alleged against accused, Court cannot quash a criminal proceeding.(2) Cognizance of offence – Magistrate can ignore conclusion ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
