IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. if the allegations do not prima facie constitute an offence and if the proceedings are found to be initiated with mala fide intentions.

JUDGMENT :

Mayank Kumar Jain, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. Present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to set aside the impugned order dated 21.7.2023 in Special Criminal Case No. 108 of 2022 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Dacoit Affected Area), Banda, whereby the applicants have been summoned to face trial under Section 392, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. It is also prayed to stay further proceeding of the aforesaid case during pendency of present application.

3. The case of the complainant as set out in this complaint is that:-

3.1. That the marriage of the first informant was solemnized in 2005 with the daughter of applicant no. 1. Out of this wedlock, one son namely Harshit was born. The son is residing with the applicants after the death of his mother.

3.2. The first informant is working as a professor/doctor in Government Hospital, Banda.

3.3. The applicants are keeping Harshit with them without any authority and have fetched thousands of rupees from the first informant.

3.4. On 9.3.2022, at around 3:40 P.M., applicant no. 1 armed with a rifle, applicant no. 2 carrying a hockey stick along with 3-4 unknown persons possessing lathi, danda in their hands, arrived at the house of opposite party no. 2.

3.5. Applicant no. 1 made a demand of Rs. 10 lacs for the education and welfare of Harshit.

3.6. When opposite party No. 2 expressed inability to give such money, applicant no.1 became furious. He exhorted other persons to kill him. The complainant was badly beaten up by all persons with kicks, fists, lathi danda and butt of the rifle.

3.7. Applicant No. 2 snatched gold chain worth Rs. 1,00,000/- and applicant no. 1 took Rs. 50,000/- cash from the drawer. When opposite party No. 2 raised alarm, witnesses Hub Lal and Asha came there. When they challenged the applicants, the applicants ran away threatening the complainant with life.

4. The application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was treated as complaint. The statement of complainant was recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. The statements of the witnesses such as PW-1 Hub Lal and PW-2 Pavitri Devi were recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C.

5. The learned Special Judge (DAA), Banda, vide summoning order dated 21.07.2023 summoned the applicants to face trial under Sections 392, 323, 504, and 506 I.P.C.

6. Mr. Imran Ullah, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicant no. 1 is a senior citizen aged 87 years. He is a retired Judicial Officer. He retired as Additional District and Sessions Judge in 2004. Opposite party no. 2 is son-in-law of applicant no. 1. Applicant no. 2 is son of applicant no. 1.

7. It is submitted by learned counsel that the applicants are residing in District Kanpur Nagar. It is not possible for applicant no. 1, who is 78 years old to travel up to Banda to commit such incident. He is bracketed an accused by his son-in-law. Opposite party no. 2 instituted proceedings against applicant no.1 to obtain custody of Harshit. The same proceedings are still pending. The interim application of the first informant had been dismissed.

8. It is vehementally argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that date of occurrence, as alleged in the complaint, is 09.03.2022. whereas, the medical examination was allegedly conducted on 12.03.2022. Opposite party No. 2 was posted in the same district hospital at Banda. Therefore, it is highly improbable that one person who is a doctor in the same hospital is not examined at the first opportunity. It is also submitted that application to S.S.P. was given on 16.04.2022, i.e. one month after the date of alleged incident. The complaint has been filed after two and half month from the date of occurrence. These facts demonstrate that the entire proceedings have been initiated as a counter blast on the basis of concocted facts and forged medical report.

9. It is further submitted that the applicant had no reason to go to B