High Court refused to quash a previous order rejecting an application under Section 120 Bhairava. The Court noted cogent reasons and findings in the lower court order and found no case for indulgence.
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.
1
Reserved
Court No. - 51 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30114 of 2019 Applicant :- Ramji Prasad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Ors Counsel for Applicant :- Purushottam Mani Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA for the State.
The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 23.5.2019 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, Court No. 4 (Anti Corruption Act), Gorakhpur in Session Trial No. 32 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No. 342 of 2012, under Sections 364, 302 and 201 IPC, P.S. Chiluatal, District Gorakhpur.
I have perused the impugned order dated 23.5.2019 by means of which the application filed under Section 120 Kha by the applicant has been rejected. Perusal of the said order shows that while rejecting the said application the court below has given cogent reasons and findings and has based upon the law. The relevant portion of the said order reads herein as under:
“cpko i{k ds vf/koDrk dk ;g rdZ gS fd lh0Mh0vkj0 dh Nk;k izfr dwV jfpr nLrkost gS tks Lo;a oknh eqdnek ds }kjk rS;kj fd;k x;k gS tks fd Nk;kizfr gS mldh dksbZ ewy izfr ugh gS rFkk bldks Lo;a ds }kjk fdu ek/;eks ls ,df=r fd;k x;k gS rFkk dgka ls ,df+=r fd;k x;k gS bl lanHkZ esa dksbZ lk{; ugh gSA vr% ;g izkFkZuk i= dsoy foYkEc djus ds vk'k; ls eqdnes esa u;s QthZ lk{; ds vkM+ esa eqdnesa dks yafcr djus ds vk'k; ls fn;k x;k gSA
i=koyh ds lE;d~ voyksdu ls Li"V gS fd i=koyh ij dky fMVsy laca/kh dksbZ Hkh vk[;k ugh gSA cpko i{k ds vf/koDrk ds rdZ ds vuqlkj ih0MCyw02 f'ko dqekj us U;k;ky; ds le{k dgk gS fd mlus dHkh fdlh foospd dks dky fMVsy dh dkih ugh fn;k Fkk vkSj dsl Mk;jh ds voyksdu ls ;g Li"V gS fd fdlh Hkh foospd us lh0Mh0vkj0 izkIr djus laca/kh dksbZ Hkh izkFkZuk i= vius ofj"B vf/kdkjh dks fn;k Fkk ;k ugh] u rks dsl
2
Mk;jh esa Li"Vr% mYys[k gS vkSj u gh foospd Jhizdk'k ;kno ds }kjk gh dksbZ dky fjiksVZ ,df=r fd;k x;k gSA cpko i{k dk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd blds iwoZ Hkh ih0MCyw03 vlye flnndh ds ek/;e ls lh0Mh0vkj0 dh QksVks dkih lkfcr djuk pkgrk Fkk ysfdu rRdkyhu iwokZf/kdkjh }kjk bldh vuqefr ugh nh x;hA ih0MCyw04 Jh izdk'k ;kno }kjk lh0Mh0vkj0 izkIr djus ds laca/k esa u rks mldh eq[; ijh{kk esa vkSj u gh izfr ijh{kk esa bl laca/k esa dksbZ iz'u iwNk x;k gSA cfYd Jhizdk'k ;kno us viuh izfrijh{kk esa ;g Lohdkj fd;k gS fd viuh foospuk ds nkSjku mUgksus dksbZ lh0Mh0vkj0 izkIr ugh fd;k FkkA
i=koyh ds voyksdu ls ;g Hkh Li"V gS fd izLrqr izkFkZuk i= 120[k ds lkFk dkWy fMVsy fjiksVZ dh Nk;k izfr nkf[ky dh x;h gS] ;g Nk;kizfr dkWy fMVsy fjiksVZ dh dgka fdl dk;kZy; ls fdl foospd ;k lacaf/kr vf/kdkjh us bls izkIr fd;k] bl laca/k esa i=koyh ij dksbZ lk{; ugh gSA vr% bl Nk;kizfr dkWy fMVsy fjiksVZ dks fof/kr% Lohdkj ugh fd;k tk ldrk gSA U;k;ky; dks fopkj.k ds nkSjku dksbZ Hkh lk{; ,df=r djus dk rkRi;Z fQj ls u;h foospuk dks tUe nsuk gSA /kkjk 91 na0iz0la0 ds vkyksd esa ,sls nLrkost tks fof/kr% fdlh vf/kdr O;fDr vf/kdkjh ds ikl gks muls og nLrkost U;k;ky; fopkj.k ds le; ekax ldsxk ysfdu izLrqr ekeys esa ,slk dksbZ lk{; ugh gSaA Nk;kizfr lh0Mh0vkj0 fjiksVZ dh ewy izfr dgka vkSj fdlds ikl gS bl laca/k esa dksbZ lk{; i=koyh ij miyC/k ugh gSA cpko i{k ds rdZ ds vuqlkj fnukad 30-03-2019 dks ofj"B iqfyl v/kh{kd dk;kZy; ls fjiksVZ bl vk'k; dh vk pqdh gS fd vc dksbZ Hkh nLrkosth lk{; miyC/k ugh gSA ;g Hkh egRoiw.kZ gS fd izLrqr i=koyh ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; }kjk le;c) lhek ds vanj fuf.kZr fd;s tkus dk vkns'k fd;k x;k gS blds ckotwn ckj ckj oknh eqdnek dh rjQ ls u;s lk{; ds ladyu gsrq izkFkZuk i= fn;k x;k gS tks fof/kd nf"V ls iks"k.kh; ugh gSA ”
The findings as extracted above are based on a clear appreciation of law to which no illegality or perversity has been attributed by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Thus, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, no case for grant of any indulgence is made out.
Accordingly, the application is rejected.
Order Date :- 6.9.2019 Kuldeep
1 issue framed by the court
Whether there is any case for granting indulgence and quashing the impugned order under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Ramji Prasad
Vipin Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
