Court No. - 82

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17429 of 2022

Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Gupta And 5 Others

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Dubey

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

The applicants are challenging the summoning order dated

04.05.2022 whereby they are summoned in a Complaint Case

No. 668 of 2022 under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504 I.P.C.

Sri Piyush Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants submits

that it is a case of counterblast then an F.I.R. was lodged from

the applicants side on 18.02.2022 against the complainant side

wherein after investigation charge sheet has been filed. On the

same incident, the complainant side (accused in the F.I.R.) filed

an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. which was treated

to be a complaint case and on the basis of the statements

recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the summoning

order has been passed.

Learned counsel submits that even the statements so recorded,

no case is made out against the applicants.

The above submissions are opposed by learned A.G.A. for the

State and he submits that on the basis of the statement so

recorded, prima facie, a case is made out against the applicant.

Therefore, under the powers of 482 Cr.P.C., this Court cannot

interfere in the summoning order.

The law with regard to interference under inherent jurisdiction

of issue of process on complaint case is well settled which is

summarized in following paragraphs:

(I) The procedural scheme in respect of the complaints made to

Magistrate is provided under Chapter XV of the Code of

Criminal Procedure. On a complaint being made to a

Magistrate, he is required to examine the complainant on oath

and the witnesses, if any, (Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C.) and

then on considering the complaint and the statements on oath, if

he is of the opinion that there is no sufficient ground for

proceeding, the complaint shall be dismissed after recording

brief reasons (Section 203 Cr.P.C.). Section 201 Cr.P.C. states

that in case Magistrate who is not competent to take cognizance

of the offence he shall, (i) if the complaint is in writing, return it

for presentation to the proper Court with an endorsement to that

effect; (ii) if the complaint is not in writing, direct the

complainant to go to the proper Court.

(II) The Magistrate may on receipt of a complaint of which he

is authorised to take cognizance proceed with further inquiry

into the allegations made in the complaint either himself or

direct an investigation into the allegations in the complaint 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 (Section 202 Cr.P.C.), in that event, the

Magistrate in fact postpones the issue of process. It is Provided

in Section 202 Cr.P.C. that no such direction for investigation

shall be made, (i) where it appears to the Magistrate that the

offence complained of is triable exclusively by the Court of

Sessions; or (ii) 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 Cr.P.C.. In an

inquiry under Sub-Section (1), the Magistrate may, if he thinks

fit, take evidence of witness 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.

(III) On conclusion of inquiry by himself or on receipt of report

from the police officer or from such other person who has been

directed to investigate into the allegations, if, in the opinion of

Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence there is no sufficient

ground for proceeding, complaint is dismissed under Section

203 Cr.P.C. or where the Magistrate is of the opinion that there

is sufficien