Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.
Santosh Kumar and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Respondents
Application U/s 482 No. 28822 of 2018
Decided On : 27-02-2024
Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Quashing of summoning order - Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. - [Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C.] - The court discussed the allegations in the complaint, the statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C., and the specific provisions of the Indian Penal Code. The court referred to the judgment in the case of Lakshman Singh vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and emphasized the requirement for specific allegations and the absence of a condition precedent for summoning an accused under Section 323 I.P.C. The court set aside the summoning order in respect of Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. and directed the proceedings to proceed only in respect of Section 323 I.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the summoning order in a complaint case where they were accused of offenses under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. The allegations involved a dispute over land and a physical altercation resulting in injuries to the complainant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the summoning order in respect of Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. was not tenable and set it aside, directing the proceedings to proceed only in respect of Section 323 I.P.C.
Issues: The issues involved the validity of the summoning order under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and the specificity of the allegations made in the complaint and statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the requirement for specific allegations and the absence of a condition precedent for summoning an accused under Section 323 I.P.C. It also highlighted the need for specific and non-vague allegations to protect the fundamental rights of the accused.
Final Decision: The present application was partly allowed, and the summoning order in respect of Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. was set aside, directing the proceedings to proceed only in respect of Section 323 I.P.C.
JUDGMENT :
VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State-respondent.
2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicant for quashing the summoning order dated 31.5.2018 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st Gorakhpur in Complaint Case No. 3915 of 2017, Jai Narayan vs. Shri Ram and Others, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Khorabar, District Gorakhpur along with the entire proceedings.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that as per the allegations in the complaint, it is alleged that the opposite party no. 2/complainant had executed a sale deed in favour of wife of applicant no. 2 for an area of 15 decimal. However, in the consolidation proceedings, the area in favour of the wife of applicant no. 2 has been recorded 21 ayer from Arazi No. 591 and from another Arazi No. 665, 37 ayer and in this respect, proceedings before the Consolidation Officer is going on. A perusal of the complaint and the statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C. of the opposite party no. 2 would demonstrate that the incident is of 12.10.2017 when both the sides were negotiating where the dispute arose and it is alleged that the complainant was beaten by the accused persons including the applicants, as a result of the same, the opposite party no. 2 suffered injuries. The accused persons have also abused the opposite party no. 2.
4. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that no such incident has taken place and the applicant no. 1 and applicant no. 3 were not at the place of incident on the date when the incident taken places. The present criminal proceedings are abuse of process of law and no offence under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. is made out against the applicants.
5. Sri Anil Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has opposed the present application and submits that in the complaint specific allegation has been made with regard to the complaint being beaten by the accused persons and suffered injuries. The injuries are not condition precedent for proceedings under Section 323 I.P.C.
6. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has drawn attention to the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Lakshman Singh vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand), 2021 (1) SCC 191. He submits that since the complainant has suffered injury and he has made a statement before the court concerned under Section 200 Cr.P.C. therefore, the present application lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. However, he does not dispute the fact that the proceedings for correction of the record are pending before the consolidation court.
7. In the present case, it is to be seen that the complainant/opposite party no. 2 has filed a complaint with the allegation that the complainant has sold the land to the wife of applicant no. 2 to the extent of 15 decimal in Arazi No. 591. However, during consolidation proceedings, the name of wife of applicant no. 2 has been recorded to the extent of 21 ayer in Arazi No. 591 and upto 37 ayer in Arazi No. 665. The complainant is disputing the consolidation proceedings and in this respect, proceedings are going on before the consolidation court.
8. It is further to be seen that in the complaint the occurrence has taken place on 12.7.2017 where both the parties were negotiating for settlement in which a dispute arose and it is alleged that the accused persons have beaten the complainant, as a result of the same, the complainant sustained injuries. The accused persons have also abused the complainant. On the aforesaid basis, summoning order has been issued against the applicant under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C.
9. It is to be noted that in the complaint as well as in the statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C. it is alleged that the accused persons including the applicants have beaten the complainant. Learned counsel for the applicant could not dispute the proposition of law laid down by the
AI
Specific allegations and absence of a condition precedent for summoning an accused under Section 323 I.P.C. Vagueness in allegations violates the fundamental rights of the accused under Article 21 of....
The absence of medical evidence precludes prosecution under serious charges, emphasizing the need for a Magistrate to apply legal standards before summoning an accused.
A detailed appreciation of evidence is not required at the stage of summoning of an accused person.
The court established that the issuance of summons in criminal cases requires a thorough examination of the evidence and allegations, and that a mechanical approach by the magistrate is impermissible....
The court emphasized the importance of fair disclosure and timely filing of complaints, and considered the status of civil proceedings in property disputes when deciding on the quashing of criminal p....
The court emphasized the requirement of a prima facie case to summon the accused and the necessity of injury report in determining the sufficiency of grounds for summoning the accused.
The court emphasized the necessity for consistent evidence in summoning orders and declared the proceedings an abuse of process due to contradictions and retaliatory motives behind the complaint.
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
