Allahabad High Court
HARIOMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The Court found a prima facie case and held that there was no ground to quash the summons or the proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.
Summary
The applicant filed a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash a summons issued by a Judicial Magistrate in a complaint alleging assault and criminal intimidation. The applicant claimed the complaint was false, baseless, and that no prima facie case existed against him. The State argued that the complaint, statements of the complainant, and witness testimonies established a prima facie case. The High Court examined whether a prima facie case was made out and whether the court could intervene at this stage under Section 482. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court held that the dispute of fact and defence could not be decided at this interlocutory stage and that a prima facie case existed. Consequently, the petition to quash the summons and proceedings was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether a prima facie case of offences under Sections 323 and 506 IPC is made out against the applicant.
- Whether the High Court can quash the summons and the criminal proceedings at the interlocutory stage under Section 482 CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 200, 202, 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 504, 506
Subjects
- Section 482 CrPC
- quash petition
- prima facie case
- criminal complaint
- summons
- interlocutory jurisdiction
- false allegations
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39305 of 2024
Hariom
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravi Shanker Rawet
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vikram Shah Sisodia
Court No. - 81
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard learned Counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused
the record. No one is present on behalf of opposite party no.2.
2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant
to quash the summoning order dated 04.10.2024, passed by learned Civil
Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Atrauli, Aligarh, in Complaint
Case No. 129 of 2024, Veerpal Singh v. Hariom, under Sections 323 and
506 I.P.C., Police Station Palimukeempur, District Aligarh as well as the
entire proceedings of the aforesaid case.
3. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant that on
15.02.2024, the grandfather of the applicant had lodged a First Information
Report against the opposite party no.2 as Case Crime No. 81 of 2024 under
Sections 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. Opposite party no.2 filed the present
compliant regarding the incident dated 19.03.2024 against the applicant
whereas no such incident occurred at that time. The applicant had not beaten
the opposite party no.2. The applicant is a student and this compliant has
been filed with false and baseless allegations just to spoil his career. The
opposite party no.2 got himself examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and
witnesses Teekam Singh and Narendra Kumar under Section 202 Cr.P.C.
The learned Magistrate has not taken into consideration the statements of
complainant and witnesses properly and summoned the applicant under
Sections 323 and 506 I.P.C., whereas no prima facie case is made out
against the applicant, therefore, the summoning order as well as entire
A482 No. 39305 of 2024
2
proceedings of the aforesaid case may be quashed.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the
allegations made in the complaint, the statements of the complainant and
witnesses and the material collected during the course of investigation,
prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such,
entire proceedings cannot be quashed.
5. As per record, opposite party no.2 filed a compliant against the applicant
regarding the incident dated 19.03.2024 in which he has made an allegation
that the applicant has abused and beaten him. The opposite party no.2 got
himself examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and witnesses Teekam Singh
and Narendra Kumar under Section 202 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the learned
Magistrate has summoned the applicant under Sections 323 and 506 I.P.C.
6. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the
case at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the
applicant. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question
of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power
conferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to
be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P.
Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs.
Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992
SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd.
Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed
defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any
ground to quash the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing
the same is hereby refused.
8. Accordingly, the application is dismissed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
March 25, 2026
Vijay
Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…