RAM BHAROSE LAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Application, under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed by the Applicants, Ram Bharose Lal, Jai Singh and Kallu, against State of U.P. and Smt. Meena, with a prayer for quashing of entire criminal proceeding as well as setting aside summoning order, dated 30.7.2019, passed by III Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), Budaun, in SST No.1478 of 2019 (Complaint Case No.49 of 2018), Meena vs. Ram Bharose Lal and others, under Sections 392 and 354 of IPC, Police Station-Bisauli, District-Budaun.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicants argued that it was a false and malicious accusation, filed by way of an application, under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. and was treated as a complaint case, as a counter-blast of case crime no.675 of 2017, for offences, punishable, under Sections 392 and 354 of IPC of Police Station-Bisauli, District Budaun, for which a report was lodged by Ram Bharose Lal against Hira Lal, when Hira Lal outraged modesty of victim, daughter of informant on 7.10.2017, wherein a chargesheet has been filed and as a counter-blast case, wife of Hira Lal, has filed this case against applicants, wherein, applicant no.1, is father, whereas, applicant nos. 1 and 2 are his sons, with false accusation and III Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (DAA), Budaun, acting as the Magistrate, has failed to appreciate facts and law placed before it and passed impugned summoning order without application of judicial mind, with above prayer.

(3.) To bolden his submission, learned counsel for applicants has placed reliance on an order, dated 29.8.2016, of another coordinate Bench of this Court, passed in Application, U/S No.25387 of 2016, Brijveer Singh and another vs. State of U.P. and another, wherein, law laid down by Apex Court, in the case of M/S. Pepsi Food Ltd. and another vs. Special Judicial Magistrate and others, 1998, UPCr.R 118, has been discussed.