IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
Kanwarpal @ Lala and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Respondents
Application U/s 482 No. 38783 of 2022
Decided On : 13-04-2023
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 482 - Offence of Murder – Charged - Informant did not name anyone for involvement in murder of his nephew - Investigating Officer tried to record the evidence but nothing relevant was found by him - Investigating Officer while conducting the investigation reached the house of deceased wherein was being performed, during conversation amongst people present there, he came to know that sometime back there had been a quarrel between, son and deceased. During course of investigation, Investigating Officer on came to know that uncle of deceased was also been suspected for involvement in murder of deceased - Statements of son were recorded, from where it was found that the aforesaid persons had nothing to do with alleged incident - aforesaid persons in their statements clarified position, uncle of deceased for his non involvement in alleged murder - Statement were also recorded and position of uncle remained same.
Finding of Court : Learned counsel for applicants submits that as requirement u/s 202(2) all witnesses of complainant associated or connected with his interest and those witnesses who are material and relevant to prove prosecution case were not examined especially in a case exclusively triable by court of session, that as per provisions contained in Section 202(2), it is provided that if it appears to Magistrate that offence complained of, is triable exclusively by Court of Sessions, he shall call upon complainant to produce all his witnesses and examine them on oath - Other situation is where protest has been filed which and Magistrate treats same as complaint, he would have to follow procedure of section 200 and 202 of Code - Complainant and his witnesses have to be examined - Present protest petition filed by informant fulfill requirements of complaint , same was treated as complaint and after recording statements of complainant as well as witnesses u/s 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. respectively, applicants have been summoned.
Result : Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Chandra Bhan Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 13682 of 2021 (Smt. Sarla vs. Kanwarpal @ Lala and Others), under section 302 IPC, Police Station Chapprauli, District Baghpat as well as impugned summoning order dated 26.08.2022 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat.
3. Brief facts of the case is that an FIR was lodged by Trishpal, son of Bishambhar on 11.03.2019 at 13:18 hours which was registered as Crime No. 60 of 2019, under section 302 IPC at Police Station Chhaprauli, District Baghpat against unknown persons with the allegation regarding missing of his nephew Samrat whose dead body was found on 11.03.2019 at 10:30 am on road side near a pulia.
4. On 11.03.2019, the postmortem of the aforesaid dead body was conducted wherein some injuries were noted and cause of death was due to throttling and shock.
5. The matter was investigated by Investigating Officer and statement of the informant namely Trishpal was recorded 11.03.2019. In the aforesaid statement, the informant did not name anyone for involvement in murder of his nephew. On 14.03.2019, the Investigating Officer tried to record the evidence but nothing relevant was found by him. On 15.03.2019, the Investigating Officer while conducting the investigation reached the house of the deceased wherein Terahvin was being performed, during the conversation amongst the people present there, he came to know that sometime back there had been a quarrel between Pappu, Deshpal son Padam Singh and the deceased. During course of investigation, the Investigating Officer on 17.03.2019 came to know that the uncle of the deceased namely Kanwarpal @ Lal was also been suspected for involvement in murder of the deceased. On 20.03.2019, the statements of Ashok son of Padam Singh, Deshpal @ Kala, Pappu son of Padam and Bindar were recorded, from where it was found that the aforesaid persons had nothing to do with the alleged incident. On 25.03.2019 while investigating the matter, the Investigating Officer found that some dispute had taken place between the deceased and his uncle Kanwarpal but later on compromise was entered between the two. Likewise on 26.03.2019, 18.04.2019 and 22.04.2019 all efforts were made by Investigating Officer to find out the truth behind the alleged murder of deceased Samrat son of Shamsher. On 03.05.2019, statement of Shamsher (father of deceased), Smt. Sarla (mother of the deceased), Bharti and Shakshi (daughters of Shamsher) were recorded. The aforesaid persons in their statements clarified the position of Kanwarpal, uncle of the deceased for his non involvement in the alleged murder. On 07.05.2019, the statement of Shubham and Vicky were also recorded and the position of uncle namely Kanwarpal remained the same. On 10.05.2019, 21.05.2019 and 06.06.2019 statements of other persons were also recorded and the Investigating Officer could not gather any information about the murder of the deceased on the alleged dates. On 02.08.2019, the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of Kuldeep, Deepak, Harendra Singh and Ashok who stated that Manisha, aunt of the deceased is resident of village Soop from where relevant information may be gathered regarding the alleged incident. Statement of Deshpal Singh, Tejpal and Omveer Singh were also recorded on 16.08.2019 but the Investigating Officer could not gather any information about the culprit.
6. On 15.10.2019, the investigation was handed over to SHO, Chapprauli Sri Dinesh Kumar and he was the fourth Investigating Officer, who started the investigation on 28.10.2019 but could not find anything relevant about the murder of the deceased Samrat. Finally on 28.05.2020, the Investigati
Point of Law : Judicial conscience of High Court would persuade it to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash such criminal proceedings, for that would prevent abuse of process o....
(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 ....
A magistrate can independently assess investigation materials and register a protest petition as a complaint if sufficient grounds are provided, emphasizing the standard of prima facie evidence at th....
The power to investigate is exclusively reserved for the police officers, and the High Court cannot change the investigating officer in the midstream and appoint any agency of its own choice to inves....
Cognizance under serious charges requires substantive evidence; mere allegations without corroboration do not justify legal proceedings.
The court emphasized that discrepancies in the complainant's case and the defense raised by the accused could be appreciated at the stage of trial, and the existence of other disputes between the par....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.