Disposed
Sanjeet Lall v. State of U.P. and Another
Allahabad HCA482/20252/2018
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20252 of…
What the court decided
AI extract
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20252 of…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 49 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20252 of 2018 Applicant :- Sanjeet Lall Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Imran Ullah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, Advocate has filed a short counter affidavit alongwith his appearance slip on behalf of the opposite party no.2 today, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the the entire proceedings of Case No. 6342 of 2014, arising out of Case Crime No. 845 of 2014, under Sections- 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Civil Lines, DistrictAllahabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though the FIR was lodged against the applicant as well, however, at no point of time, the applicant was involved in the commission of any offence as alleged.
Even, the informant has come to realize that the applicant was not involved in the commission of offence and consequently during further investigation that was held by the police, an affidavit filed by the opposite party no.2 with regard to compromise entered into between the parties was also brought on record of the prosecution. Consequently, the police had submitted a supplementary report and expunged the applicant's name.
In such circumstance, it has been submitted that the present prosecution has no legs to stand.
Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel has filed a short counter affidavit on behalf of the opposite party no.2, and has clearly supported the case set up by the applicant.
Sri Ratnendu Kumar Singh, learned AGA, however, submits that once the investigation had been conducted by the police and a charge sheet had been submitted upon sufficient material that had come on record to proceed against the applicant, there remains no ground to quash the present prosecution.
However, learned AGA does not dispute that the material brought on record by way of further investigation. It is also not disputed that this material would also have to be necessarily considered before proceeding further.
The prayer for quashing the same is not being considered at this stage. The summoning court has been vested with sufficient powers to discharge the accused even before the stage to frame the charges comes, if for reasons to be recorded it considers the charge to be groundless.
As prayed, the applicant is permitted to appear before the concerned court within a month from today through his counsel and move an application claiming discharge on the material that existing on the prosecution file both charge sheet alongwith supplementary report which contains affidavit submitted by the opposite party no.2. The concerned court shall after hearing the counsel decide the application on merits, in accordance with law, within a period which shall not exceed a period of three months from today.
No coercive measures shall be adopted against the applicant for a period of three months from today or till the disposal of the discharge application, whichever is earlier.
If the concerned court after hearing the counsel for the accused feels persuaded to have the view that the accused ought not to have been summoned and the charge is groundless it shall not abstain from discharging the accused only on the ground that the material available at the time of summoning was the same which is available on record at the time of hearing the discharge application. On the other hand, if the lower court even after hearing the counsel for accused holds the view that the accused has been rightly summoned and the material brought on record does not indicate the charges to be groundless it shall make an order to that effect and proceed further in the matter, in accordance with law and shall also be free to adopt such measures to procure the attendance of the accused as the law permits.
With the above observations, this application stands disposed of .
The question of quashing the prosecution may be examined after disposal of discharge application.
Order Date :- 4.6.2018 Lbm/-
Sanjeet Lall
State Of U.P.
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court