Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
Yogeshwar Raj Nagar – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anish Kumar Gupta, J.
1. Heard Sri Ashutosh Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Vimlendu Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. Both the aforesaid cases are arising out of the same cause of action and facts of both the cases are similar to each other. In view thereof, both the cases are being decided by this common judgement.
3. The writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of the order dated 28.04.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Bulandshahar in Criminal Revision No. 2 of 2018 ( Yogeshwar Raj Nagar and Another vs. State of U.P. and Another ) as well as the order dated 06.10.2017 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Bulandshahar, in Complaint Case No. 536 of 2017 ( Shailja vs. Yogeshwar ) under Section 406 of I.P.C. Vide order dated 06.10.2017, the petitioners were summoned for the offence under Section 406 I.P.C. in the aforesaid complaint case filed by the opposite party no. 2 against which a criminal revision was preferred by the petitioner which was also dismissed vide order dated 28.04
A second complaint on the same cause of action after acceptance of a final report is maintainable only in exceptional circumstances; summoning orders must reflect judicial application of mind.
The amendment to Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. mandates that a Magistrate must conduct an inquiry before issuing summons against an accused residing outside the jurisdiction, to prevent false complaints....
A subsequent criminal complaint based on the same facts as a previously accepted final report is not maintainable unless exceptional circumstances are shown; mere acceptance of a final report does no....
A detailed appreciation of evidence is not required at the stage of summoning of an accused person.
The Magistrate must conduct an inquiry under Section 202 of Cr.P.C. before issuing summons if the accused resides outside its jurisdiction, as this is mandatory to prevent harassment through false co....
The inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. is mandatory when the accused resides beyond the Magistrate's jurisdiction, and summoning an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter requiring the applica....
(1) Merely because list of witnesses was not filed alongwith protest petition, it cannot be said that protest petition cannot be treated as a complaint.(2) Fair, just and proper investigation is esse....
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
