Allowed

Smt. Ranjeet Kaur and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2018A482/15964/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an order rejecting a discharge application. The order below was set aside due to lack of recorded reasons, and the matter was remitted to the Sessions Court.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 26.4.2018 setting aside discharge application applied for quashing; matter remitted to court below; consequential orders set aside.

Smt. Ranjeet Kaur and 2 Others Vs State of U.P… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 49 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15964 of 2018

¶2

Applicant :- Smt. Ranjeet Kaur And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nazrul Islam Jafri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,I D Misra

¶3

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶5

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the order dated 26.4.2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Session Trial No.379/2017 (State Vs. Amanveer Singh and Others), arising out of Case Crime No.419/2017, under Sections-147, 148, 452, 307/149, 302/149, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Bilaspur, District- Rampur, pending in the court of Session Judge, Rampur.

¶6

The matter is listed in the heading of top ten cases. Case called out but none has appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2.

¶7

The present application has been filed against the order dated 26.4.2018 by which the learned court below has rejected the application filed by the applicant dated 26.4.2018 and thus deprived the applicant of his right to claim discharge.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant then submits that a short adjournment was sought to prepare a proper discharge application while the applicant was still in custody.

¶9

In absence of any reason being given by the learned court below to reject the discharge application the order dated 26.4.2018 cannot be sustained especially in view of the fact that it does not appear that the applicant had sought any earlier or other adjournment.

¶10

The right to claim discharge is a statutory right which is available to the accused only before framing of charge. The discharge having been denied the applicant would have to stand trial and wait for acquittal, after the completion of trial.

¶11

Consequently, the order dated 26.4.2018 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the learned court below. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes to file a discharge application along with certified copy of this order within 15 days from today. Subject to discharge application being filed before the learned court below the same may be decided keeping in mind the settled principles of law in this regard and the charges may be framed only after disposal of the discharge application.

¶12

Consequential order if any that may have been passed in pursuance of the order dated 26.4.2018 shall also stand set aside.

¶13

Accordingly, the application is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 1.8.2018 Gaurav Pal

Smt. Ranjeet Kaur and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Ranjeet Kaur and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Beenu Nagar Vs State of Up

Surya Bhan Singh @ Nankawa Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Kumar (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ruksad Khan (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohit Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Abdul Hussain Vs State of U.P. and Another