Munna Gupta Alias Munna Prasad Others v. Smt. Anar Devi

Judgment

1. This criminal miscellaneous application has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (B.N.S.S.) by the Applicants, challenging the summoning order dated 28.03.2019 passed by the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, in Criminal Complaint Case No. 3798 of 2018, and the revisional order

dated 22.10.2024 passed by the First Additional District and Sessions Judge, Haridwar, in Criminal Revision No. 341 of 2019, whereby the summoning order was upheld.

2. The genesis of the case lies in a complaint made by the Respondent, Smt. Anar Devi, who alleged that on 01.11.2018, while she and her daughter Pinky were alone at home, the Applicants, her neighbours,unlawfully entered her residence, physically assaulted both of them, tore their clothes, and attempted to strangle her daughter using a rope. The complaint further stated that the husband of the 1 Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 816 of 2025…………Munna Gupta Alias Munna Prasad & Othersvs Smt. Anar Devi Ashish Naithani J. complainant arrived just in time to prevent further harm, and that independent witnesses, namely Bhanumati and Vinayak, also witnessed the incident. Medical assistance was sought immediately, and a report was prepared.

3. The complaint was first filed under Section 156(3) CrPC but was treated as a private complaint. The statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. were recorded, and based on the material and witness statements, the trial court found a prima facie case and issued summons against the Applicants. A revision against this order was dismissed by the sessions court.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. The learned counsel for the Applicants submitted that the complaint filed by the Respondent is false, motivated, and Nothing more than a counterblast to a previous complaint filed by ApplicantNo. 2, Saroj Gupta, in the year 2017 against Anar Devi and her family.

6. Learned Counsel for the Applicants submitted that Applicant No. 3, Gopal Kumar, has taken the plea of alibi, asserting that he was not present in Haridwar on the date of the alleged incident. It was contended that he was pursuing his studies in Delhi and had travelled to Varanasi on 01.11.2018. In support of this plea, documents including a Delhi University library card, a volunteer identification card for the Khelo India School Games, and a train reservation ticket were placed on record to establish his presence at a place other than the scene of the occurrence. 2 Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 816 of 2025…………Munna Gupta Alias Munna Prasad & Othersvs Smt. Anar Devi Ashish Naithani J.

7. It was further argued that the summoning order was passed mechanically, without proper application of mind, and without adequate supporting evidence. According to the Applicants, there were no independent witnesses, and the complaint was a misuse of the judicial process aimed at harassing them. The Applicants asserted that the summoning order lacked reasoning and was a Non-speaking order that deserved to be set aside.

8. In response, the learned counsel for the complainant, supported by the learned A.D.G.C. (Criminal), opposed the application and justified the impugned orders. It was submitted that the summoning order was passed only after the trial court had recorded the statements of the complainant under Section 200 CrPC and examined four witnesses under Section 202 CrPC. Two of these witnesses, Bhanumati and Vinayak, were neighbours and independent of the parties, and they corroborated the complainant’s version.

9. The Respondent’s counsel further argued that the allegation regarding Gopal Kumar’s absence from Haridwar was not substantiated by credible or contemporaneous documentation. The documents submitted, such as expired ID cards and a reservation ticket, were not conclusive proof of his absence. Moreover, the fact that Gopal Kumar himself had mentioned his Haridwar address in the present petition directly contradicted the claim that he was a long-term resident of Delhi. 3 Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 816 of 2025…………Munna Gupta Alias Munna Prasad & Othersvs Smt. Anar Devi Ashish Naithani J.

10. It was also pointed out that proceedings under Section 83 CrPC were initiated against him by the trial court, based on a report from the Municipal Councillor, which itself had inconsistencies, thereby further necessitating scrutiny at the stage of trial.

11. This Court is of the opinion that no grounds are made out for interference in the concurrent findings of the trial and revisional courts. At the stage of issuing summons, the Magistrate is only required to ascertain the existence of a prima facie case. A detailed evaluation of evidence is not warranted at this preliminary stage.

12. In the present case, the learned trial court examined the complainant and her witnesses, including independent neighbours, who supported the version of events. There is also a medical report indicating injury, lending further credence to the allegations. The trial court considered all these materials and found sufficient grounds to summon the Applicants. The revisional court, in turn, examined whether there was procedural irregularity or illegality summoning order and rightly concluded there was None.

13. As far as the argument of a “counterblast” is concerned, the Applicants have not been able to establish that the prior complaint by Saroj Gupta and the present complaint by Anar Devi arose out of the same incident or were part of a continuous chain of retaliatory legal action. The two incidents are separate in time and content, and whether 4 Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 816 of 2025…………Munna Gupta Alias Munna Prasad & Othersvs Smt. Anar Devi Ashish Naithani J. there is malicious prosecution is a matter that will have to be tested during the trial, Not at the summoning stage.

14. As regards the plea of alibi advanced for Gopal Kumar, this Court finds no merit in the materials relied upon. The documents produced are neither contemporaneous with nor conclusive of his absence from the place of occurrence. An expired library card and an identity card pertaining to an event held several months prior to the incident have no evidentiary value to establish his presence in Delhi on the relevant date. The railway reservation ticket, at best, evidences a booking and not actual travel.

15. Significantly, in the very bail application before this Court, the Applicant has furnished a Haridwar address, which materially undermines the claim of his being elsewhere. These aspects raise disputed questions of fact that can only be tested through cross- examination and appreciation of evidence during trial. Therefore, the plea of alibi cannot be accepted at this stage.

16. The argument that the summoning order is vague, and Non- speaking is without merit. The trial court’s order refers to the witness statements and the material filed and records its satisfaction about the existence of a prima facie case. It cannot be said that the order was passed mechanically or without application of mind. The revisional court also carefully evaluated the relevant materials and reached the same conclusion. 5 Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 816 of 2025…………Munna Gupta Alias Munna Prasad & Othersvs Smt. Anar Devi Ashish Naithani J. ORDER Accordingly, the considered view of this Court, summoning order dated 28.03.2019 and the revisional order dated

22.10.2024 are legally sound, do not suffer from any infirmity, and warrant no interference under Section 528 of BNSS. The complaint discloses cognizable offences and raises triable issues. The Applicants are free to raise their defence before the trial court in accordance with law. The Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 816 of 2025 is hereby dismissed. The impugned orders dated 28.03.2019 and 22.10.2024 are affirmed.

04.08.2025 Ashish Naithani, J. Arti ARTI SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=487ed955e722ba65aab55409e686c12fb83a19325e8b66890fbee418e7b69c0d, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=26DC90E00D839E3E8714131F235087D2D87E133C57E7F4A7B2E734BE2521F982, cn=ARTI SINGH 6 Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 816 of 2025…………Munna Gupta Alias Munna Prasad & Othersvs Smt. Anar Devi Ashish Naithani J.