Held that the supplementary charge-sheet cannot be quashed as no illegality is found. Applicant directed to surrender within 45 days for bail consideration per cited precedents.
Application for quashing refused; applicant directed to surrender within 45 days for bail consideration.
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. - 53
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21173 of 2018
Applicant :- Vishal Sarswat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the supplementary charge sheet no. 74-A of 2018 dated 24th April, 2018 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2335 of 2018 (State of U.P. vs. Govind Sarswat & Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 731 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 323, 324, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Mathura pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Mathura.
By means of the supplementary charge-sheet dated 24th April, 2018, the name of the applicant has been included as an accused in the aforesaid case.
It is stated on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is brother-in-law of the victim (opposite party no.2) and is a teacher in a private institution. His implication on same set of evidence and charges was initially omitted, while filing of initial charge-sheet and but without there being any other material he has been erroneously included in the supplementary charge-sheet. Applicant was teaching in a school and his implication is malicious.
Learned Additional Advocate for the State has opposed the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicant.
Perusal of the records would go to show that various injuries have been caused to the victim (opposite party no.2) and specific role in the first information report has been assigned to the applicant. In the aforesaid case on the basis of evidence collected supplementary chargesheet has been submitted against him. This Court finds no illegality in it so as to warrant any interference in proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The prayer for quashing the supplementary charge-sheet submitted in the aforesaid case is refused.
However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant appears
and surrenders before the court below within 45 days and no more from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of .
Order Date :- 12.6.2018
Sushil/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the supplementary charge-sheet adding the applicant as an accused in a 498-A case should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Whether an accused should be directed to surrender for bail consideration under settled law in similar circumstances.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶13
2004 (57) ALR 290
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶13
2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
6 provisions across 2 enactments
Vishal Sarswat
State Of U.P.
Govind Sarswat
Ashwani Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
