LALJEE TIWARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the Petitioners for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1006 of 2007 under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Bansi, District Siddharth Nagar pending against the applicants before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bansi, District Siddharth Nagar along with summoning order dated 4.6.2007.

(2.) It reveals from the perusal of the record that an N.C.R. No. 91/2006 under Section 504 and 506 I.P.C. was lodged at police Station Bansi by Jagjivan, opposite party No. 2 herein. Thereafter an application was moved before the Judicial Magistrate, Bansi to the effect that under the provisions of Section 156(2) Code of Criminal Procedure, the S.H.O. concerned be directed to investigate the case whereupon learned Magistrate vide order dated 20.12.2006 ordered for investigation of the case. The case was investigated upon by the police and a report was submitted by the police to this effect that offence under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. is not made out and a prayer was made that 'final report' be accepted and the matter be closed. Thereafter a protest petition was filed by opposite party No. 2 alongwith his affidavit. Learned magistrate after hearing the opposite party No. 2 and going through the 'final report' submitted by the investigating officer was of the view that the investigating officer has not properly investigated the case and in view of the protest petition and affidavit annexed therewith the final report dated 13.1.2007 was rejected as the Petitioners were summoned under the provisions of Section 190(1)(b) Code of Criminal Procedure to face the trial for the offence punishable under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. vide impugned order dated 4.6.2007. Feeling aggrieved with the said order, this petition has been filed.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned A.G.A. for the State (opposite party No. 1). None appeared on behalf of the complainant opposite party No. 2, who had filed his counter-affidavit stating therein that the cognizance has been taken under the provisions of Section 190(1)(b) which is just, legal and proper and there is No. misuse of the process of the Court and there is No. illegality or irregularity in the impugned order and this petition is misconceived and devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed with costs.