Krishna Veer Singh and Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Hon''ble Naheed Ara Moonis, J.—Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicants, the learned AGA appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.

The instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Applicants with a prayer to quash the order dated 26.4.2011, passed by IIIrd Additional Civil Judge(Junior Division), Bijnor in case No. 1244 of 2010, under Sections 323, 324, 452, 504, 506, 147, 148 IPC, P.S. Chandpur, District Bijnor.

The opposite party No. 2 had filed a complaint on 23.10.2007 that on 26.6.2007 the Applicants had barged into the house of the complainant and started hurling abusive language to the daughter and the wife of the complainant, destroyed the household goods. The co-accused Vijai Veer Singh had assaulted with knife and other co-accused assaulted with lathi-danda to the wife of the complainant. The have also taken away the ornaments and two thousand rupees and other articles. The statements of the complainant Rajiv Tyagi was recorded u/s 200 Code of Criminal Procedure and of other witnesses, namely Shashi Kumar Tyagi, Ompal Singh and Saroj Devi were recorded u/s 202 Code of Criminal Procedure The learned Magistrate on the basis of statements prima facie found that the offence made out against the Applicants and passed the impugned summoning order dated 26.4.2011.

It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Applicants that, on the basis of an application dated 22.9.2007 on similar allegation a first information report was registered in which after investigation the police has submitted the final report on 29.10.2007 on the ground that the civil disputes were going on between the parties in respect of the partition of the house. A civil suit is still pending between the parties.

It is further submitted that no offence is made out against the Applicants and the Applicants has been falsely implicated in the case.

On the other hand learned AGA contended that on the basis of statements of the complainant as well as of the witnesses, the court below took cognizance of the matter and summoned the Applicants to face the trial. There is no illegality or perversity in the summoning order.

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the Applicants. Both the cases can be dealt with and proceeded as a State case. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure At this stage only a prima case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. The State of Punjab, and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

The prayer for quashing of summoning order is refused. The petition has no merit and it is accordingly dismissed. However, the Applicants are directed to appear and surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered in view of the settled law laid down by the Seven Judges'' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and Anr. Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon''ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (67) ACC 966 SC Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. after hearing the Public Prosecutor. For a period of thirty days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the Applicants. Vijai Veer Singh, Lav Kumar and Sachin, the Applicants No. 2, 3 and 6, who are said to be minor, in case any application for exemption is moved on their behalf u/s 205 Code of Criminal Procedure the same shall be decided by the court below in accordance with law especially looking into the nature of allegation made against them. However, in case the Applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.