LexMUKHTAR ZAIDI versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
* Author [2024] 4 S.C.R. 655 : 2024 INSC 316 Mukhtar Zaidi v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 2134 of 2024) 18 April 2024 [Vikram Nath* and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether CJM as also the High Court fell in error in taking cognizance u/s. 190(1)(b) Cr.P.C. inasmuch as the CJM had relied upon not only the Protest Petition which was supported by affidavit of the complainant but also on the affidavits of witnesses which were filed along with the Protest Petition to support the contents of the complaint. Headnotes Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.190(1)(b), s.200 – FIR lodged – Police report filed u/s. 173(2) Cr.P.C. – I.O. found that no evidence could be collected which could substantiate the allegations made in the FIR – Protest Petition filed along with affidavit – The CJM rejected the police report u/s. 173(2) Cr.P.C., however, proceeded to take cognizance for offences u/ ss. 147, 342, 323, 307, 506 of the IPC and u/s. 190 (1)(b) of the Cr.P.C. – Appellant contended that once the CJM was relying upon additional material in the form of evidence produced by the complainant along with the Protest Petition then the only option for the CJM was to treat it as a complaint u/s. 200 Cr.P.C. and proceed accordingly following the due procedure in Chapter XV of the Cr.P.C. – Correctness: Held: The CJM had actually taken into consideration not only the Protest Petition but also the affidavit filed in support of the Protest Petition as well as the four affidavits of witnesses filed along with the Protest Petition – It was based on consideration of such affidavits that the CJM was of the view that the investigation was not a fair investigation and these affidavits made out a prima facie case for taking cognizance and summoning the accused – In the instant case as the Magistrate had already recorded his satisfaction that 656 [2024] 4 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports it was a case worth taking cognizance and fit for summoning the accused, this Court is of the view that the Magistrate ought to have followed the provisions and the procedure prescribed under Chapter XV of the Cr.P.C. – Accordingly, impugned orders passed by the High Court and also the CJM are set aside. [Paras 7 and 11] Case Law Cited Vishnu Kumar Tiwari v. State of Uttar Pradesh, through Secretary Home, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow & Anr. [2019] 8 SCR 1114 : (2019) 8 SCC 27 – relied on. List of Acts Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. List of Keywords FIR; Report of police officer on completion of investigation; Protest Petition; Witness; Additional materials; Cognizance; Summoning of accused; Complaints to magistrate. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 2134 of 2024 From the Judgment and Order dated 24.08.2021 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in A482 No.15273 of 2021 Appearances for Parties Vinod Prasad, Sr. Adv., Ajay Kumar Srivastava, Ms. Jyoti Tiwary, Rajesh Pandey, Advs. for the Appellant. Shashank Shekhar Singh, Shantanu Singh, Shekhar Prit Jha, S.S. Haider, Ms. Preeti Kumari, Advs. for the Respondents. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Vikram Nath, J. Leave granted. 2. This appeal assails the correctness of the order dated 24.08.2021 passed by the Allahabad High Court dismissing the application under [2024] 4 S.C.R. 657 Mukhtar Zaidi v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731 filed by the appellant wherein a prayer was made to quash the Summoning Order dated 08.03.2021 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate2, Aligarh in Case No.129/2020 under Sections 147, 342, 323, 307, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 18603 Police Station, Civil Lines, District Aligarh. There is an order dated 01.11.2021 passed by the High Court wherein the Case Number mentioned in the order dated 24.08.2021 was corrected as Case No.5727/2021. 3. Respondent no.2 lodged a First Information Report4 bearing the aforesaid details whereupon the same was investigated and after investigation the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. was submitted according to which the Investigating Officer found that no evidence could be collected which could substantiate the allegations made in the FIR. The said report was submitted to the Court concerned whereupon notices were issued to the informant. The informant filed a Protest Petition along with affidavits to show that the investigation carrie
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.