RAKESH KUMAR AND ANOTHER Vs. GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seek to quash the summoning order dated 23.02.2008, passed by 1st Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in Complaint Case No. 23 of 2007, under Sections 406, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, PS Pathri, District Haridwar.

(2.) A complaint was filed by the respondent against four accused persons including the applicants, in respect of offences punishable under sections 323, 504, 506 and 406 IPC. The allegation against the applicants, in a nutshell, was that the respondent-complainant gave one digital camera (Sony) to the applicants on 28.11.2006, but the applicants, in spite of substantial lapse of time, did not return the camera to the respondent. A compromise was entered into between the parties on 18.10.2007, in which the applicants agreed to return the camera to the respondent, but they did not return the same.

(3.) Hon'ble Supreme Court in Amit Kapoor vs. Ramesh Chander and another, 2013 1 SCC(Cri) 986, has laid down certain principles in respect of exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Those principles are summarised as under: