Advocates:
['CHANDRA BHAN KUSHWAHA', 'G A', '', 'MAHENDRA SINGH']

Court No. - 84

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3580 of 2022

Petitioner :- Ramswaroop Singh And Another

Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Bhan Kushwaha

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Mahendra Singh

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

Sri Mahendra Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2

submitted that although he has filed his power in the office on

06.07.2022 but, his name is not shown in the cause list.

Heard Sri Chandra Bhan Kushwaha, learned counsel for the

petitioners, Sri Mahendra Singh, learned counsel for the

opposite party no.2, Sri Arvind Kumar, learned AGA for the

State and perused the record of the case.

By way of present petition, petitioners made prayer to quash the

summoning order dated 24.12.2021 passed in Complaint Case

No. 886 of 2019, under Sections 352, 452, 323, 504 IPC as well

as lower revisional court order dated 15.04.2022 passed in

Criminal Revision No. 28 of 2022.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that on the basis

of totally false and frivolous allegation, a complaint was filed

against the applicants and without considering the facts of the

case, the trial court summoned the petitioners under Sections

352, 452, 323, 504 IPC. He further submitted that before filing

the complaint, opposite party no.2 filed an application before

the police concerned, but in that application he did not allege

that petitioners entered in the house and only in the complaint

opposite party no.2 made such an allegation, therefore, the

offence under Section 452 IPC is not made out against the

petitioners. He further submitted that earlier petitioners side

also filed two complaints against opposite party no.2 and only

under retaliation, as a counterblast, the complaint was filed in

the instant matter against the petitioners. He further submitted

that although opposite party no.2 sustained injuries, but his

injuries are simple in nature. He further submitted that both the

courts below failed to peruse and analyse the correct facts of the

case and in routine manner without any proper application of

mind, summoned the petitioners in the present case.

Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the opposite

party no.2 submitted that there is no illegality in the order

passed by the courts below as prima facie offence under

Sections 352, 452, 323, 504 IPC is made out against the

petitioners and if opposite party no.2 earlier in the application

filed before the police did not allege that petitioners entered in

the house then, on that basis it cannot be said that offence under

Sections 352, 452, 323, 504 IPC is not made out as, there is

specific averment made in the complaint itself and further due

to assault by the petitioners, the opposite party no.2 sustained

injuries, therefore, trial court rightly summoned the petitioners

to face trial and revision filed by the petitioners was also rightly

dismissed by the lower revisional court.

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

Record of the case shows that there is specific allegation against

the petitioners that they entered in the house of opposite party

no.2 and assaulted him and due to their assault, opposite party

no.2 sustained injuries and his injury report is also on record,

therefore, prima facie, offence under Sections 352, 452, 323,

504 IPC is made out against the petitioners, therefore, there is

no illegality in the orders passed by the courts below. The

argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners that as

earlier petitioners lodged two complaints against opposite party

no.2, in which, he had already been summoned, therefore, as

counterblast he filed the false complaint of the present case

against the petitioners, cannot be appreciated at this stage as, it

is the matter of trial as, prima facie complaint and the statement

recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. discloses offence

under Section 352, 452, 323, 504 IPC against the petitioner