Remanded

Ramesh Chandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2018A482/32861/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the charge sheet in a maintenance of house property case, holding that the offence was non-cognizable. The application was disposed of with directions to the Magistrate to treat it as a complaint case and pass a fresh order.

What did the court decide?

The charge sheet dated 17.6.2007 is set aside; the matter is remitted to the Magistrate to treat it as a complaint case and pass a fresh order.

Ramesh Chandra Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32861 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gopal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet No.Nil of 2007 dated 17.6.2007 in Case No. 274 of 2007 (State Vs. Ramesh Chandra and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 15 of 2007, under Section 427, I.P.C., P.S. Nakur, District Saharanpur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 2nd, Saharanpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present prosecution has arisen out of NCR. It is stated that the offence as alleged are non-cognizable and therefore neither the charge sheet could have been submitted by the Investigating Officer nor the learned Magistrate could have taken cognizance in view of the explanation under Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C.

¶8

It is further stated that the only course open to the learned Magistrate was to have treated the case as a complaint case and to have proceeded with, in accordance with law accordingly.

¶9

Reliance has been placed on the decision of this Court dated 15.05.2018 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 5917 of 2006 wherein this Court has taken view that neither the charge sheet could have been submitted by the Investigating Officer nor the learned Magistrate could have taken cognizance on the same, treating it as a State case.

¶10

Learned AGA on the other hand submits that while the learned Magistrate may not have taken cognizance on the charge sheet treating it to be a State case. However, it was open to the learned Magistrate to follow the complaint case procedure.

¶11

Considering the above, no useful purpose would be in keeping the present application pending any further. The charge sheet No. Nil of 2007 dated 17.6.2007 in Case No.274 of 2007, arising out of Case Crime No.15 of 2007, under Section 427, IPC, P.S. Nakur, District Saharanpur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 2nd, Saharanpur is set aside and the matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate to pass a fresh order, strictly in accordance with law, keeping in mind the observations made above.

¶12

The aforesaid exercise may be concluded as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶13

With the aforesaid observations, the present application is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 6.12.2018 T. Sinha

Ramesh Chandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Chandra 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Parvesh Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Subodh Kumar Jain and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahesh Saini Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shivram Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Mohan Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajpal Vs State of U.P. and Anr.