JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

2. In view of order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to opposite party no.2 is dispensed with.

3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 18.2.2021, U/s 323,504,506 IPC, Police Station-Chinhat, District-Lucknow issued by the ACJM-I, Lucknow in Criminal Misc./Complaint Case No. 1571/2019 and also revisional order dated 19.9.2022 passed by the Sessions Judge, Lucknow in Criminal Revision No. 488/2022.

4. Learned counsel for applicants has submitted that the opposite party no.2 moved an application U/s 156(3) CrPC alleging therein that on 22.2.2019 at 7.30 pm when the complaint was returning after running practice for the recruitment in the police force, then suddenly accused-applicants reached G.S. Lawn and started beating him by kicks and fists. It is also submitted that the accused-applicants have looted Rs. 1800, one ring and one Nokia Mobile having mobile No. 7518452656 from the complainant. The complainant stated that he immediately informed the police station Chinhat about the said incident and to the SSP, Luckow on 25.2.2019 for lodging of the FIR against the applicants. But the FIR was not registered. Thus this application U/s 156(3) CrPC has been treated as a complaint case. Thereafter, the statement of opposite party no.2 and two witnesses namely, Suresh Kumar Yadav and Mahesh Singh were recorded U/s 200 & 202 CrPC on 30.7.2019 and 12.1.2021 respectively. Thereafter, on the basis of statements of the opposite party no.2 and witnesses recorded u/s 200 & 202 CrPC respectively, the trial court without applying judicial mind wrongly summoned the applicants.

5. The counsel for the applicants is assailing the summoning order dated 18.2.2021 on the ground that the ACJM 1st, Lucknow while passing the impugned summoning order without application of judicial mind has recorded a wrong finding that the wife of the complainant was beaten by the applicants and she has got injury but the case of complainant case was not as such. On perusal of the statement of the complainant and the witnesses recorded U/s 200 and 202 CrPC respectively, it reflects that the applicants inflicted injury to complainant. But there is no whisper regarding the presence of the wife of opposite party no.2 at place of occurrence. Thus, the findings recorded by the trial court is perverse and as such the summoning order is itself liable to be set aside. Being aggrieved with the summoning order, the applicants filed revision but the same was rejected by the learned revisional court in limine without any speaking order. Thus, it is also liable to be set aside.

6. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that as per provision of Section 202(1) CrPC, as soon as a complaint is given before the magistrate, he shall either inquire into the case or pass order for investigation, if the accused is residing outside the territorial jurisdiction of the magistrate concerned. But in the complaint case, no investigation has been made by any of the above authorized persons.

7. The provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C. read as under:-

"202. Postponement of issue of process.-(1) Any Magistrate, on receipt of a complaint of an offence of which he is authorised to take cognizance or which has been made over to him under section 192, may, if he thinks fit, [and shall, in a case where the accused is residing at a place beyond the area in which he exercises his jurisdiction] postpone the issue of process against the accused, and either inquire into the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit, for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding:

Provided that no such direction for investigation shall be made-

(a) where it appears to the Magistrate that the offence complained of is triable exclusively by the