RAM PRASAD RAWAT Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants namely, Ram Prasad Rawat, Pushpa Devi and Anurag alias Munnu, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of the Court with prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 493 of 2016, (Laxmi Devi Vs. Ram Prashad and others), pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, court No. 5, Varanasi initiated in pursuance of the impugned order dated 6.1.2018, thereby the learned court below has issued process against the applicants and the applicants have been summoned to face trial for the offences under Sections 452, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Luxa, District Varanasi.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicants pressed the law propounded by Apex Court in Abhijit Pawar Vs. Hemant Madhukar Nimbalkar and another, 2016 LawSuit(SC)1198 and Mahboob and others Vs. State of U.P. through Secretary Home Department and another, 2016 LawSuit(All)3768 and argued that applicants have been summoned in a mechanical way, without application of judicial mind by Judicial Magistrate or any enquiry under Section 202 of Cr.P.C., which was mandatory as per the provisions of amended Section 202 of Cr.P.C. Accused applicants are the resident of Allahabad and order was passed by ACJM, Court No. 5, Varanasi, which was beyond territorial jurisdiction of above summoning court. There is inconsistencies in the statement recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C. The witnesses said to be present on spot in the statement of complainant recorded under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., has been substituted by other witnesses examined under Section 202 of Cr.P.C. It was a misuse of process of law. Hence, for ensuring end of justice, this application has been filed with above prayer.

(3.) From the very perusal of complaint, it is apparent that it was filed with contention that on 5.1.2016 at about 10:00 A.M., while complainant Laxmi Devi was all alone at her home, accused Ram Prasad, his wife Puspa Devi and son Anurag alias Munnu, who were in-laws of complainant?s Dewar (brother-in-law) Om Prakash @ Sonu, did criminal trespass in the house of complainant. They were offered a cup of tea but they all became furious and started abusing under filthy languages. Upon the exportation made by Puspa Devi, Ram Prashad and Anurag alias Munnu, assaulted complainant. Her clothes became disordered. She suffered injuries. On hue and cry, Shiv Shankar, Manju Devi, Munnu and others rushed there and intervened. In the same night at about 9:43 P.M., a threat of dire consequences, through telephonic call, was made by accuse Ram Prashad. Magistrate took cognizance of above occurrence and recorded statement of complainant under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., wherein, the version of complaint was under reiteration. Magistrate did not summoned on the basis of statement recorded under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., rather as per Section 202 of Cr.P.C. and amended Section 202 of Cr.P.C., he did inquiry by himself, by recording statement of PW-1 and PW-2 under Section 202 of Cr.P.C. Then after, impugned summoning order was passed and in above inquiry statements recorded were in corroboration with previous statements recorded under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. Hence, provision of amended Section 202 of Cr.P.C. was fully complied with by Magistrate.