Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 3828 (ALL)

Raju v. State of U. P.

2015-12-04

OM PRAKASH VII

body2015
JUDGMENT Om Prakash-VII, J. This application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the order dated 13.8.2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Mathura in Criminal Revision No. 350 of 2014 (Raju and others Vs. State of U. P. and another) and the summoning order dated 20.8.2014 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Mathura in complaint case no. 554 of 2012 (Jagdish Vs. Raju and others) under Section 147 , 148, 149, 323, 452, 504, 506, 427 IPC, P. S. Raya, district Mathura. 2. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that final report was submitted in the matter which was accepted by the court concerned. Thereafter complaint was filed on the basis of same set of facts in counter blast to the F.I.R. lodged by the applicants for which charge sheet has been submitted against the opposite party no. 2. It was further submitted that concerned court while passing the summoning order did not consider the report of the investigating officer made in the final report. At this stage learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the law laid down by the Lucknow Bench of this Court in 2014 (1) JIC 563 (All) (LB) Raees and others Vs. State of U. P. and another. 3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the submission of the learned counsel for the applicants and argued that the complaint is not barred. Provision of Section 210 (2) Cr.P.C. apply only when the charge sheet has been filed in the matter or court has taken cognizance on the police report. 4. I have considered the rival submission of learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. 5. It is admitted case of the parties that final report was submitted in the matter started by the opposite party no. 2 and the same was accepted by the court concerned thereafter complaint has been filed for the same set of facts. Meaning thereby there was no charge sheet in the matter and the court has not taken cognizance on the police report. Thus the learned A.G.A. has rightly submitted that provision of Section 210 (2) Cr. P.C. is not applicable in the present matter. Meaning thereby there was no charge sheet in the matter and the court has not taken cognizance on the police report. Thus the learned A.G.A. has rightly submitted that provision of Section 210 (2) Cr. P.C. is not applicable in the present matter. As far as the maintainability of the complaint is concerned, the complainant who had lodged the F.I.R., on submission of the final report has options to file protest petition in the matter or he may file complaint directly. The Court dealing with the matter is also empowered to treat the protest petition as complaint. In the present matter no such step has been taken by the court concerned. There was no charge sheet in the matter. Thus in view of the facts and circumstances, the complaint was not barred. So long as the consideration of the report made by the Investigating Officer in the final report is concerned it is not incumbent upon the Magistrate concerned to go through the final report at the time of passing the order on the complaint. Factual aspect of the present matter differs to some extent with the facts of the case of Raees (Supra). Court below has rightly summoned the accused. No illegality, infirmity or impropriety is found in the impugned order. 6. The application is dismissed.