JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State-respondent (O.P. No.1) and perused the material available on record. As legal point is involved in the matter, no notice is required to be issued to the opposite party no.2.

2. By way of this application under Section 482 CrPC, the applicants have prayed for quashing of the order dated 15.03.2023 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Jr. Division/Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Varanasi in Complaint Case No.2803 of 2018 (Lalchand Vs. Vishwanath Singh Rathour and others), under Sections 323, 342, 379, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station-Bhelpur, District-Varanasi as well as summoning order dated 16.01.1998.

3. By means of the impugned order the learned Additional Civil Judge, Jr. Division/Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi Complaint Case No.2803 of 2018 (Lalchand Vs. Vishwanath Singh Rathour and others), under Sections 323, 342, 379, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station-Bhelpur, District-Varanasi rejected the application of the applicant under Section 197 of Cr.P.C., against which, the present application has been filed. A further prayer has been made for staying the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.2803 of 2018 (Lalchand Vs. Vishwanath Singh Rathour and others), under Sections 323, 342, 379, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station-Bhelpur, District-Varanasi.

4. On the date of incident i.e. 24.10.1997 all the applicants were posted in the District Police Varasnsi. Applicant no. 1 was posted as Chowki In-charge at Police Station Bhelpur, District Varanasi. Applicant no.2 was posted as Constable and applicant no.3 was posted as Head Constable at Police Station Bhelpur, District-Varanasi.

5. District Court, Varanasi comes within the jurisdiction of Police Station-Bhelpur, District Varanasi.

6. Brief facts of the case reads as follows:

7. During the posting of applicant No.1 (Vishwanath Singh Rathaur) as a Chawki In-charge, he received a direction issued by the learned court below vide order dated 18.10.1997 in respect of arrest of the opposite party no.2 pursuant to Case Crime No.383 of 1994, under the Motor Vehicles Act, which has been complied with by the applicant no.1 and arrested the opposite no.2 on 24.10.1997. In this regard, a compliance report has also been sent by the applicant no.1 to the learned court below, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 2 to the Application. In retaliation to the same, opposite party no.2 became annoyed with the applicants and made a false application to the Higher Authority, but the concerned Higher Authority after investigating the matter, found the complaint to be false and fabricated against the applicants. Thereafter, opposite party no.2 with a mala fide intention filed a complaint before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi on 07.11.1997 for mentioning therein that complainant was arrested by the applicants by way of summoning order, whereas, no warrant in pursuance of the arrest of the complainant was issued by the court below, under Sections 323, 342, 379, 504 and 506 IPC, which was later on registered as Complaint Case No.1358 of 1997 against the applicants.

8. Thereafter on the basis of statements of the complainants under Section 200 CrPC and witness under Section 202 CrPC, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi issued summons against the applicants for the offences under Sections 323, 342, 379, 504 and 506 IPC vide order dated 16.01.1998.

9. On behalf of the applicants, it has been submitted that the applicants were complying with the order issued by the court below, for which a complaint came to be filed and was registered as a complaint case under the aforesaid sections; mandatory provisions of sanction by the competent authority under Section 197 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short 'CrPC') could not have been ignored by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi before taking cognizance and summoning the applicants as accused.

10. On behalf of the applicants,