RAM BALAK SHAHU Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Adarsh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) This application under section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed challenging summoning order dated 2nd August, 2019 passed by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-III, Kanpur Nagar in Complaint Case No. 3737 of 2019 (Jay Narayan Sahu vs. Ram Balak Sahu and Others), under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506(2) I.P.C., Police Station Vidhanu, District Kanpur Nagar as well as entire proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants invited the attention of the Court to the summoning order dated 2nd August, 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 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 452, 323, 504, 506(2) 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 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 applicant under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506(2) I.P.C. As such, no eqnuiry was committed by the Magistrate before passing the impugned summoning order dated 2nd August, 2019.