Shashi Kant, J. - (1.) Heard Shri Murli Manohar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rao Narendra Singh, learned AGA for the State, Shri Mohammad Askari Ali opposite party no. 1 in person and perused the record.
(2.) This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order of cognizance dated 27.5.2016 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow in Criminal Complaint No. 7693/2015 summoning the petitioner under Section 364/511 IPC alongwith concerned complaint filed by the opposite party no. 1 related to Police Station Hazaratganj, District Lucknow alongwith part of order dated 6.10.2017 passed by Sessions Judge, Lucknow in Criminal Revision No. 417/2017.
(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant contended that opposite party no. 1 has cunningly not written the address of the accused person in complaint. Admittedly, applicant is resident of Azamgarh district which is beyond the jurisdiction of concerned Magistrate sitting at Lucknow. In such circumstances, in case of address of applicant was given in the complaint, Magistrate concerned was duty bound to follow procedure as prescribed under Section 202 (1) Cr.P.C. amendment in year 2006 which reads thus: "Section 202(1) in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (1) Any Magistrate, on receipt of a complaint of an offence of which he is authorized to take cognizance or which has been made over to him under section 192, may, if he thinks fit, postpone the issue of process against the accused, and either inquire into the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit, for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding.";