Allowed

Shree Ram Prasad v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC12 Jun 2018A482/21169/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this application under Section 482 CrPC, the High Court held that the lower court unjustifiably rejected proceedings after denying the applicant an opportunity to contest. Finding no reasonable notice for the hearing date, the court set aside the rejection order and restored the case to records.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 14.09.2017 was set aside and the complaint proceedings were restored to the records of the lower court.

Shree Ram Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 5… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 53

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21169 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Shree Ram Prasad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2 Ballia dated 14th September, 2017 in Complaint Case No. 13 of 2017 (Sri Ram Prasad vs. Aalam Giri & Others) under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Police Station Haldi, District Ballia.

¶7

Order records that although evidence under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been recorded but the complainant has failed to produce any evidence under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and none had appeared, therefore, the proceedings have been consigned to record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on 21st July, 2017, the matter was fixed for 20th August, 2017.

¶9

It appears that on 20th August, 2017 the court was not available and the matter was probably adjourned for 21st August, 2017 on which date the matter was fixed for 14th September, 2017.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant had no knowledge that the matter would be taken up on the next date i.e. 14th September, 2017 and as such none could appear on 14th September, 2017.

¶11

Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that there was sufficient reason for the complainant not to appear particularly as the date was not fixed within his knowledge.

¶12

Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State has not seriously opposed in view of what appears from the perusal of the order-sheets.

¶13

In the facts and circumstances of the case as noticed above, this Court finds that the court below was not justified in rejecting the proceedings, inasmuch as, the applicant has been denied reasonable opportunity of

¶14

contest in the matter.

¶15

From the facts as noticed above, it is apparent that 20th August, 2017 was a date fixed in the matter and the argument that the applicant had no knowledge that the matter would be taken up on 21st August, 2017, appears to be borne out from the records.

¶16

In such circumstances, the order impugned dated 14th September, 2017 cannot be legally sustained and is hereby set aside. The proceedings of Complaint Case No. 13 of 2017 (Sri Ram Prasad vs. Aalam Giri & Others) under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Police Station Haldi, District Ballia stands restored to the records of the court concerned. The lower court is directed to proceed further with the aforesaid case in accordance with law.

¶17

The present application is allowed subject to the observations made above.

¶18

Order Date :- 12.6.2018

¶19

Sushil/-

Shree Ram Prasad v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shree Ram Prasad v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

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

D.C Bhaiya Lal Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Pappu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sudhir Kumar Ojha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pankaj and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vishal Sarswat Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mumtaz Khan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another