Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi, J. held that an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the rejection of a Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. application is not maintainable, as the apt remedy lies in invoking different proceedings under the Act. The application was dismissed.
Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed.
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. - 67
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1881 of 2019
Applicant :- Rohit Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant is challenging the order dtaed 01.12.2018 by which the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C has been rejected.
I have gone through the order impugned and to my mind, the present 482 Cr.P.C. application is not maintainable, hence is rejected as such. The apt remedy lies by invoking different proceedings provided under the Act.
This application filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed as such with liberty to file revision.
Let the certified copy of the impugned order filed along with the present application be returned back to the learned counsel for the applicant within 15 days after having photocopy of the same.
Order Date :- 11.2.2019 Sumit S
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the rejection of a Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. application is maintainable.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Rohit Kumar
State Of U.P.
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
