Section 202 of CrPC is an enabling provision for the Court to decide on the necessity of summoning accused persons residing outside the territorial jurisdiction, without entailing a detailed trial at the inquiry stage.

JUDGMENT :

SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA, J.

1. The grievances of the applicants to the present C482 Application are as against the summoning order dated 17.09.2022, which has been issued in a Complaint Case No. 1214 of 2020, Sujata vs. Vikas Chaturvedi and Others, wherein they have been summoned to be tried for the offences under Sections 498A, 323 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. Precisely, it is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that respondent No. 2, herein, had initially filed a complaint on 11.06.2019 before the Senior Superintendent of Police, with regard to certain set of allegations leveled against the present applicants, and thereafter, the respondent had lodged a complaint under Section 156(3) of CrPC, by way of Criminal Complaint Case No. 1214 of 2020, Sujata vs. Vikas Chaturvedi and Others, pertaining to the allegations of atrocities; which stood instituted which were being exercised by the present applicants before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

3. While putting a challenge to the order of summoning dated 17.09.2022, as it has been passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, the learned counsel for the applicants has argued that there are serious procedural lapses on account of the non-compliance of the provisions contained under sub-Section (1) of Section 202 of CrPC, for the reason being, that the present applicants, since being the residents of Uttar Pradesh, the necessary compliance under Section 202 of CrPC, ought to have been made since they are residing outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Court, which has taken the cognizance.

4. In order to answer the argument, as extended by the learned counsel for the applicants, pertaining to the noncompliance of the provisions contained under Section 202 of CrPC, the reference of the provisions contained under Section 202 of CrPC themselves become necessary, which is extracted hereunder:

“202. Postponement of issue of process:

(1) Any Magistrate, on receipt of a complaint of an offence of which he is authorised to take cognizance or which has been made over to him under section 192, may, if he thinks fit, postpone the issue of process against the accused, and either inquire into the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit, for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding:

Provided that no such direction for investigation shall be made:

(a) where it appears to the Magistrate that the offence complained of is triable exclusively by the Court of Session.

(b) where the complaint has not been made by a Court, unless the complainant and the witnesses present (if any) have been examined on oath under section 200.

(2) In an inquiry under sub-section (1), the Magistrate may, if he thinks fit, take evidence of witnesses on oath: Provided that if it appears to the Magistrate that the offence complained of is triable exclusively by the Court of Session, he shall call upon the complainant to produce all his witnesses and examine them on oath.

(3) If an investigation under sub-section (1) is made by a person not being a police officer, he shall have for that investigation all the powers conferred by this Code on an officer-in- charge of a police station except the power to arrest without warrant.”

5. The provisions contained under Section 202 of CrPC is only an enabling provision which is available to the Court to decide, as to whether summon is required to be issued to the accused persons, who are the residents outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate concerned or not. The enabling provision, which has been incorporated under Section 202 of CrPC, is only to facilitate the Court to arrive at a logical conclusion as to whether the summons are at all required to be issued, because even otherwise, without conducting an inquiry as con