SIRPAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been preferred by the revisionists/accused persons against the impugned order dated 25.10.2005 passed by Special Judge (D.A.A.) Budaun in S.S.T. No. 90 of 2005, Suraj Pal v. Sirpal and others, under Sections 395 and 397, I.P.C. P.S. Rajpura, district Budaun, whereby the accused persons, the revisionists of this case have been summoned for the offence under Sections 395 and 397, I.P.C. thereby finding the prima facie case against the accused persons.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A. on behalf of State, while no one appeared on behalf of respondent No. 2, despite service sufficient for the revision on the respondent.

(3.) THE law relating to dismissal of complaint under Section 203, Cr. P.C. or issue of process against accused persons as per provisions under Section 204 of Cr. P.C. is very much clear as is held in various decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court, as well as of various High Courts. THE Magistrate shall dismiss the complaint, if he finds that no offence has been committed or if he distrusts the statement of the complainant and his witness examined and he shall also dismiss the complaint, if on a consideration of a result of inquiry or investigation, if any under Section 202, he thinks that there is no ground for proceeding. If bare perusal of a complaint or the evidence shows that essential ingredients of the offence alleged are absent or that the dispute is only of a civil nature or based on such patent absurdities in evidence that it would be waste of time to proceed further, the complaint could be dismissed. THE words "sufficient ground for proceeding" found in Section 203, Cr. P.C. show that all the Magistrates are expected to see, whether there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused for an offence and at that stage, he cannot go into the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint. THE standard of proof required at the stage of inquiry is not the same, which is expected from the complainant during trial. THE only thing is to be considered is whether there is a prima facie evidence of a criminal offence. Sufficient ground do not mean sufficient ground for conviction, but such evidence as would be sufficient to put the accused upon trial. If the Magistrate thinks that there is a prima facie case for proceeding in respect of an offence, he shall issue process against the accused. THE wide discretion has been given, as to grant or refusal of process, to the Magistrate and it must be judicially exercised. A person ought not be dragged into Court merely because the complaint has been filed. If a prima facie case has been made out, the Magistrate ought to issue process and it cannot be refused merely thinking that it is unlikely to result in a conviction. THE reasonable view is that if all things considered and a prima facie case is made out, the person charged ought to be put on his trial, so that it may appear to the complainant that justice is being done. At this stage the result of the trial is no concern of the Court. Contradictory statements of witness/witnesses has to be tested for it's truthfulness for acceptance or negation. Of-course, if the allegations made in the complaint do not disclose any offence, the Magistrate cannot summon the accused persons but when the allegations contained in the complaint disclose the offence and the same allegations have been substantiated by the evidence of the witness examined under Sections 200 and 202, Cr. P.C. and the Magistrate is satisfied with that trial should proceed against the accused persons, the order of the Magistrate for summoning the accused persons in such circumstances is very much perfect. Judicial process should not be an instrument of oppression or needless harassment. THE Court should be circumspect and judicious in exercising discretions and should take all relevant facts and circumstances into consideration while issuing process, lest it would be an instrument in the hand of private complainant as vendetta to harass the persons needlessly.