Punjab and Haryana High Court Emphasizes Compliance with Section 202 Cr.P.C. in Quashing Complaint and Summoning Order

In a recent judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court underscored the importance of complying with Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) while quashing a complaint and summoning order. The case involved a petition filed by Suraj Bhan Sharma and others seeking the quashing of a complaint and summoning order filed by Jasbir Singh Arora under Section 500, 34 IPC.

The petitioners contended that the Magistrate, despite the fact that they were residents of Kapurthala, outside the jurisdiction of the Chandigarh court where the complaint was filed, failed to conduct a preliminary inquiry as mandated by Section 202 Cr.P.C. The petitioners' counsel referred to the case of Abhijit Pawar vs. Hemant Madhukar Nimbalkar and another to support their argument that the summoning order was illegal without compliance with Section 202 Cr.P.C.

The counsel for the respondent did not contest the contention raised by the petitioners but requested the court to remand the matter to the trial Magistrate for reconsideration.

Upon considering the submissions and examining Section 202 Cr.P.C., the court acknowledged that the purpose of the amendment made to Section 202 Cr.P.C. in 2005 was to prevent false complaints and unnecessary harassment. The court concluded that compliance with Section 202 Cr.P.C. was necessary in this case to allow the accused petitioners to present their defense and for the court to assess the sufficiency of grounds for summoning the accused.

Consequently, the court set aside the summoning order passed by the Judicial Magistrate and the subsequent order passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge. The matter was remanded back to the trial court with directions to comply with Section 202 Cr.P.C. before proceeding further in accordance with the law.

Decided on: 08.05.2023

Suraj Bhan Sharma and others vs Jasbir Singh Arora