Back
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
VIPIN CHANDRA DIXIT
Krishna Mohan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vipin Chandra Dixit, J.
1. This criminal revision under Section 397 /401 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of revisionists against the summoning order dated 7.6.2022 passed by Judicial Magistrate-IIIrd, Gorakhpur in Complaint Case No.147428 of 2021 (Gulab Shankar Singh vs. Krishna Mohan Singh & others), by which revisionists were summoned under Sections 307 & 392 IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the father of opposite party No.2 had executed a will deed on 9.12.2014 in favour of opposite party no.2. The brother of opposite party no.2 namely Kripa Shanker Singh had filed a suit for cancellation of will deed which was registered as Case No.1464 of 2016. The application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC filed for interim injunction was rejected by the learned trial court vide order dated 17.1.2018. The brother of opposite party No.2 had challenged the order dated 17.1.2018 by filing Misc. Appeal No. 14 of 2018 and the lower appellate court vide order dated 26.2.2019 was pleased to set aside the order dated 17.1.2018 and directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of suit property.
3. It is further noted that there was dispute regarding ancestral property in betwee
A Magistrate must provide reasons and apply judicial mind when summoning accused in a complaint case, failing which the order is liable to be set aside.
At the stage of summoning, the Magistrate is not required to consider the defense version or evaluate the merits of the materials or evidence of the complainant.
The issuance of process in serious criminal offenses must not be mechanical; proper evaluation of evidence and roles of each accused is essential for establishing a prima facie case.
The court emphasized that the issuance of process against accused must be based on a proper assessment of evidence, ensuring that legal proceedings are not misused by summoning accused individuals wi....
The mandatory requirement of recording evidence under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. before summoning the accused and the limited nature of the inquiry under Section 202.
Magistrate was not bound by the final report submitted by the police after investigation. Once he has taken cognizance under Section 190(1)(a) Cr.P.C. he may have taken into consideration the evidenc....
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
