Vikas Mishra Lalji v. Brij Mohan and another) pending in the court of Addl. Session Judge/Special Judge

1. Hear Shri Rajiv Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri S.K. Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 24 of 2024 (Vikas Mishra @ Lalji Vs. Brij Mohan and another) pending in the court of Addl. Session Judge/Special Judge (Docoity Affected Area), Jalaun at Orai as well as the order dated 7.8.2024 by which the applicant no. 1 has been summoned under sections 323, 387 and 392 IPC and applicant no. 2 under sections 323 and 392 IPC.

3. Brief facts of the case are that an incident has occurred on 13.7.2023 in which while the applicant taken out a sum of Rs.1,30,000/- from the Bank and was going to Orai to give the same to his brother, he was obstructed by the applicants and they have snatched the amount of Rs.1,30,000/- and also assaulted the opposite party no. 2. In the aforesaid incident the opposite party no. 2 has sustained the injuries and he was taken to the Hospital and medically examined. For the said incident an FIR was lodged by the opposite party no. 2 being case crime no. 790 of 2023 at P.S. Kotwali District Jalaun at Orai. The matter was investigated and final report was submitted. Subsequent therto the opposite party no. 2 has filed a protest petition which was treated as a complaint case. Subsequent thereto after recording the statements of the witnesses under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. and applicant no. 1 has been summoned under sections 323, 387 and 392 IPC and applicant no. 2 under sections 323 and 392 IPC. The aforesaid summoning order has been challenged by the applicant in the instant case.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that as per the provisions of Section 223 BNSS it was mandatory for the Magistrate to provide an opportunity of hearing to the applicants before summoning them. Therefore, the summoning order is bad in law and cannot be sustained. Therefore, he seeks quashing of the said summoning order.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. relying upon the provisions of Section 531 BNSS submits that if the incident is prior to the coming into force of the BNSS the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure can be said to be in operation with regard to any appeal, petition or trial or inquiry or investigation pending prior to the coming into force of the BNSS. Thus since the date of incident is 13.7.2023, which is prior to coming into force of the provisions of BNSS and section 531(2) (a) categorically state that the proceedings for an incident committed prior to the coming into force of the BNSS any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending, then, such appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation shall be disposed of, continued, held or made, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this court has carefully gone through the records of the case. Section 531 of BNSS reads as under: "531. Repeal and savings. (1)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is hereby repealed. 2)Notwithstanding such repeal-(a) if, immediately before the date on which this Sanhita comes into force, there is any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending, then, such appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation shall be disposed of, continued, held or made, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as in force immediately before such commencement (hereinafter referred to as the said Code), as if this Sanhita had not come into force; (b) all notifications published, proclamations issued, powers conferred, forms provided by rules, local jurisdictions defined, sentences passed and orders, rules and appointments, not being appointments as Special Magistrates, made under the said Code and which are in force immediately before the commencement of this Sanhita, shall be deemed, respectively, to have been published, issued, conferred, specified, defined, passed or made under the corresponding provisions of this Sanhita;(c) any sanction accorded or consent given under the said Code in pursuance of which no proceeding was commenced under that Code, shall be deemed to have been accorded or given under the corresponding provisions of this Sanhita and proceedings may be commenced under this Sanhita in pursuance of such sanction or consent. 3)Where the period specified for an application or other proceeding under the said Code had expired on or before the commencement of this Sanhita, nothing in this Sanhita shall be construed as enabling any such application to be made or proceeding to be commenced under this Sanhita by reason only of the fact that a longer period therefor is specified by this Sanhita or provisions are made in this Sanhita for the extension of time."

7. From the aforesaid provision it is clear that the proceedings which was initiated prior to coming into force of the BNSS, if there is any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending, then, such appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation shall be disposed of, continued, held or made, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Therefore, this court do not find any force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant herein. Otherwise also from the allegations as made in the complaint which are supported by the statements of the witnesses recorded under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., prima-facie a case is made out against the applicants and no interference is called for by this Court.

8. For the aforesaid reasons, the application lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 6.8.2025 o.k. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)

1. Hear Shri Rajiv Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri S.K. Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 24 of 2024 (Vikas Mishra @ Lalji Vs. Brij Mohan and another) pending in the court of Addl. Session Judge/Special Judge (Docoity Affected Area), Jalaun at Orai as well as the order dated 7.8.2024 by which the applicant no. 1 has been summoned under sections 323, 387 and 392 IPC and applicant no. 2 under sections 323 and 392 IPC.

3. Brief facts of the case are that an incident has occurred on 13.7.2023 in which while the applicant taken out a sum of Rs.1,30,000/- from the Bank and was going to Orai to give the same to his brother, he was obstructed by the applicants and they have snatched the amount of Rs.1,30,000/- and also assaulted the opposite party no. 2. In the aforesaid incident the opposite party no. 2 has sustained the injuries and he was taken to the Hospital and medically examined. For the said incident an FIR was lodged by the opposite party no. 2 being case crime no. 790 of 2023 at P.S. Kotwali District Jalaun at Orai. The matter was investigated and final report was submitted. Subsequent therto the opposite party no. 2 has filed a protest petition which was treated as a complaint case. Subsequent thereto after recording the statements of the witnesses under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. and applicant no. 1 has been summoned under sections 323, 387 and 392 IPC and applicant no. 2 under sections 323 and 392 IPC. The aforesaid summoning order has been challenged by the applicant in the instant case.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that as per the provisions of Section 223 BNSS it was mandatory for the Magistrate to provide an opportunity of hearing to the applicants before summoning them. Therefore, the summoning order is bad in law and cannot be sustained. Therefore, he seeks quashing of the said summoning order.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. relying upon the provisions of Section 531 BNSS submits that if the incident is prior to the coming into force of the BNSS the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure can be said to be in operation with regard to any appeal, petition or trial or inquiry or investigation pending prior to the coming into force of the BNSS. Thus since the date of incident is 13.7.2023, which is prior to coming into force of the provisions of BNSS and section 531(2) (a) categorically state that the proceedings for an incident committed prior to the coming into force of the BNSS any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending, then, such appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation shall be disposed of, continued, held or made, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this court has carefully gone through the records of the case. Section 531 of BNSS reads as under: "531. Repeal and savings. (1)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is hereby repealed. 2)Notwithstanding such repeal-(a) if, immediately before the date on which this Sanhita comes into force, there is any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending, then, such appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation shall be disposed of, continued, held or made, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as in force immediately before such commencement (hereinafter referred to as the said Code), as if this Sanhita had not come into force; (b) all notifications published, proclamations issued, powers conferred, forms provided by rules, local jurisdictions defined, sentences passed and orders, rules and appointments, not being appointments as Special Magistrates, made under the said Code and which are in force immediately before the commencement of this Sanhita, shall be deemed, respectively, to have been published, issued, conferred, specified, defined, passed or made under the corresponding provisions of this Sanhita;(c) any sanction accorded or consent given under the said Code in pursuance of which no proceeding was commenced under that Code, shall be deemed to have been accorded or given under the corresponding provisions of this Sanhita and proceedings may be commenced under this Sanhita in pursuance of such sanction or consent. 3)Where the period specified for an application or other proceeding under the said Code had expired on or before the commencement of this Sanhita, nothing in this Sanhita shall be construed as enabling any such application to be made or proceeding to be commenced under this Sanhita by reason only of the fact that a longer period therefor is specified by this Sanhita or provisions are made in this Sanhita for the extension of time."

7. From the aforesaid provision it is clear that the proceedings which was initiated prior to coming into force of the BNSS, if there is any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending, then, such appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation shall be disposed of, continued, held or made, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Therefore, this court do not find any force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant herein. Otherwise also from the allegations as made in the complaint which are supported by the statements of the witnesses recorded under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., prima-facie a case is made out against the applicants and no interference is called for by this Court.

8. For the aforesaid reasons, the application lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 6.8.2025 o.k. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)