PRADEEP KUMAR CHABBRA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Ranjit Saxena, learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A. for State.

(2.) This application under section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed challenging entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 4024 of 2006, (Sanjay Vs. Pradeep), under Section 448 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Hathras, District Hathras, pending in the Court of C.J.M., Hathras.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants invited attention of the Court to summoning order dated 10.01.2008. He submits that summoning order passed by Court below is wholly arbitrary and therefore liable to be set aside by this Court. Elaborating his submission, learned counsel for applicant submits that Court below has simply recorded a conclusion that on basis of complaint, statement of the complainant and his witnesses, prima facie an offence under section 448 IPC appears to have been committed. The said conclusion recorded by Court below is not preceded by a discussion of allegations made in complaint or statement of the complainant and his witnesses as recorded under sections 200 and 202 Cr. P. C. He, therefore, submits that in absence of any finding recorded by the Court below, on the basis of the averments made in the complaint statement of complainant and that of witnesses, no prima facie satisfaction was recorded by Court below for summoning the applicant under section 448 IPC.