High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of criminal proceedings, holding that allegations on record suffice to make out a prima facie case and no legal error was shown in the impugned order.
Application dismissed for lack of merit; interim order, if any, vacated.
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. - 34
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10269 of 2004
Applicant :- Mohd. Tayyab And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- V.M. Zaidi,M J Akhtar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
"15. The High Court should have seen that when a specific grievance of the appellant in his complaint was that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 379 read
with Section 34 IPC, then the question to be examined is as to whether there are allegations of commission of these two offences in the complaint or not. In other words, in order to see whether any prima facie case against the accused for taking its cognizable is made out or not, the Court is only required to see the allegations made in the complaint. In the absence of any finding recorded by the High Court on this material question, the impugned order is legally unsustainable.
16. The second error is that the High Court in para 6 held that there are contradictions in the statements of the witnesses on the point of occurrence.
17. In our view, the High Court had no jurisdiction to appreciate the evidence of the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") because whether there are contradictions or/and inconsistencies in the statements of the witnesses is essentially an issue relating to appreciation of evidence and the same can be gone into by the Judicial Magistrate during trial when the entire evidence is adduced by the parties. That stage is yet to come in this case."
(emphasis added)
Order Date :- 5.11.2019 Ashish Pd.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings exists at this stage where commission of cognizable offence appears to be made out on allegations.
Whether High Court can appreciate evidence of contradictions in witness statements under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Md. Allauddin Khan Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.Referred¶7
Criminal Appeal No.675 of 2019 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.1151 of 2018) (Md. Allauddin Khan Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.)
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohd. Tayyab And Others
Sudhir Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
