LAL BABU SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Jai Raj Singh Tomar, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. representing opposite party No. 1.

(2.) This application under section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed challenging summoning order dated 29.04.2006 passed by Judicial Magistrate-II Kanpur Dehat, in Case No. 1650 of 2006 (Rajawant vs. Raju Singh and others), under Sections 498A , 504 and 506 I.P.C., pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Kanpur Dehat.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants invited the attention of the Court to the summoning order dated 29.04.2006. He submits that the order impugned in the present application is wholly arbitrary and therefore liable to be set aside by this Court. Elaborating his submission, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the Court below has simply recorded a conclusion that on the basis of the complaint, the statement of the complainant and his witnesses, prima facie an offence under Sections 498A , 504 and 506 I.P.C. appears to have been committed. The said conclusion recorded by the Court below is not preceded by a discussion of the allegations made in the complaint and the 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, the statement of the complainant and that of the witnesses, no prima facie satisfaction was recorded by the Court below for summoning the applicants under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. As such, no eqnuiry was committed by the Magistrate before passing the impugned summoning order dated 29.04.2006.