RAM KRISHNA GAUTAM ,J. - (1.) This Application, under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed by the Applicants, Smt. Indresh and Lekhraj, against State of U.P. and another, with a prayer for setting aside summoning order, dated 5.7.2019, passed by the Court No.9 of Additional Sessions Judge, Moradabad, alongwith order dated 26.7.2018 of Court No.5 of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, V, Moradabad, with entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No.1082 of 2012, under Sections 323, 504, 420, 506 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), Police Station- Civil Lines, District Moradabad.
(2.) Learned counsel for applicants argued that, on the basis of statements recorded, under Sections 200 and 202 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), applicants were summoned for offences, punishable, under Sections 323 and 504 of IPC. Subsequently, on the basis of same evidence, which was recorded under Section 244 of Cr.P.C., Magistrate opined to frame charges for offences, punishable, under Sections 420 and 506 of IPC. This order was challenged before the Court of Revision, wherein, Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.9, Moradabad, in Criminal Revision No. 123 of 2018, Lekhraj and another vs. State of U.P. and another, dismissed revision and, thereby, confirmed order of the Magistrate, which was abuse of process of law. Hence, this proceeding, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., with above prayer. Learned AGA, representing State of U.P., has vehemently opposed this Application.
(3.) Heard learned counsel for both sides and gone through materials on record. From very perusal of materials on record, it is apparent that an Application, under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. was filed by Smt. Anjlina against Lekhraj and his wife, Indresh, with this contention that accused persons entered in a negotiation with her for sale of a plot of area, admeasuring to 7770.11 Squire ft. of Gata No. 761, situated at Sonapur, Milak Bhola Singh, in the year 2004, for which documents of ownership were shown and Lekhraj said himself to be power of attorney-holder of recorded owner Dharam Singh and is competent to sell it. Complainant entered into sale, which was executed on 17.5.2004, by Lekhraj, in favour of complainant, for a sale consideration of Rs.71,000/-. subsequently, another plot, admeasuing 25 Squire Yard, adjacent to above plot, was also agreed to be sold to the complainant, by way of registered agreement to sale, for a consideration of Rs.45,000/-. Lateron, it was found that above land was acquired land of Moradabad Development Authority and accused persons were not competent to make sale of the same. On enquiry being made by the complainant, they abused and did assault, with extending threat of dire consequences. Hence, this Application, with a prayer for direction for registration of case crime number for investigation of the same. This was treated to be a complaint case by the Magistrate, wherein, complainant was examined, under Section 200 and her one witness, Charan Singh was examined, under Section 202 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, the Magistrate, vide order, dated 19.3.2013, summoned Lekhraj and his wife for offences, punishable, under Sections 323 and 504 of Cr.P.C. After it, prosecution witness was examined, under Section 244 of Cr.P.C., thenafter, under Section 245 of Cr.P.C., the Magistrate opined for framing of charge for additional Sections of 420 and 506 of IPC also. This order was challenged in Criminal Revsion, Under Section 397 of Cr.P.C., wherein, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.9, Moradabad, passed impugned judgment, dated 5.7.2019, dismissing Criminal Revision. Hence allegations, levelled, in complaint, since beginning, were having ingredients for offences, under Sections 323, 504, 420 and 506 of IPC, though summoning was made for offence, under Section 323 and 504 of IPC, but at the time of framing of charge, when appreciation of evidence was made, then the Magistrate found ground for levelling of additional sections of 420 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, which were added by the Magistrate and this order, after having been challenged, in revision, stood confirmed. Hence, there was sufficient ground for adding of these offences. ;