This reservation of rights application under Section 482 CrPC challenged the framing of charges without hearing the applicants. The court noted an order dated 02.06.2018 stating the accused were present. Finding no illegality, the application was 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. - 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25919 of 2018
Applicant :- Sudhakar Mishra @ Saurabh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeshver Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Gaurav Gupta
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State as well as Shri Gaurav Gupta, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that at the time of framing of charge, the applicants have not been heard and the charges have been framed.
Per contra, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 has drawn the attention of the Court towards the order dated 02.06.2018, which categorically stated that the accused persons are present at the time of framing of charge and in their presence, charges have been framed and the case has been listed for adducing the evidence.
In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the facts mentioned in the order dated 02.06.2018, there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order.
Present application is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 Nadim
1 issue framed by the court
Whether charges framed in the absence of the applicants constitute an illegality warranting quashing under Section 482 CrPC.
Sudhakar Mishra @ Saurabh And 3 Others
Rajiv Gupta, J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
