DILSHAD HUSAIN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Mohit Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A, who is representing the opposite party no.1.

(2.) The present application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed challenging the summoning order dated 01.01.2019 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge (S.D.), Fast Track Court Rampur, in Complaint Case No. 1607 of 2018 (Shabana v. Dilshad and others), whereby the applicants have been summoned under Sections 452, 354, 506 I.P.C. in the above mentioned complaint case.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants invited the attention of the Court to the summoning order dated 01.01.2019. 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 applicants 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 452, 354, 506 IPC 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 or 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 452, 354, 506 IPC. Consequently the applicants have been summoned by the Magistrate without holding any enquiry.