Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
RAJNISH KUMAR
Sarfaraj – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rajnish Kumar, J.
1. Heard Sri Mohammad Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Rakesh Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
2. The instant application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (here-in-after referred as CrPC) has been filed for setting aside the summoning order dated 13.04.2021 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) / Judicial Magistrate, Raibarelly in Complaint Case No.9/2019 (new Case No.22/2019); Mohd. Ismayl Khan Vs. Sarfaraj and Others, under Sections 147 , 427, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Jayas, District Amethi pending in the court of learned Fast Track Court / S.D., Raibarelly and the order dated 18.04.2022 passed by learned Fifth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Raibarelly in Criminal Revision No.12/2022; Mohd. Jaleel Vs. Mohd. Ismayl Khan and Others and the order dated 30.07.2022 passed by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raibarelly in Criminal Revision No.139/2022; Sarfaraj and Others Vs. State of U.P. and another alongwith the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No.9/2019 (new Case No.22/2019); Mohd. Ismayl Khan Vs. Sarfaraj and
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of intentional insult to provoke a person to break the public peace or commit any other offence under section 504 I.P.C.
A detailed appreciation of evidence is not required at the stage of summoning of an accused person.
The judgment establishes that mere abusive language does not suffice to constitute an intentional insult under Section 504 IPC, and that the essential elements of criminal intimidation must be clearl....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the need to prevent the misuse of the provisions of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and to discourage dis....
While considering discharge application, Court is to exercise its judicial mind to determine whether a case for trial has been made out or not – In such proceedings, Court is not to hold mini trial b....
The court established that allegations in the FIR did not constitute extortion or criminal intimidation, emphasizing the distinction between civil disputes and criminal offences.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the abuse of criminal proceedings in a civil dispute and the requirement to consider whether a prima facie case is made out and whether the proceed....
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
