Allowed

Dhooram Chaudhary v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC25 Feb 2019A482/3506/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a charge sheet filed under Section 129A of the RPA, 1951. The court quashed the cognizance order and remanded the matter to the Magistrate to reconsider summons based on investigation materials.

What did the court decide?

Cognizance order dated 31.7.2012 was quashed and the matter was remanded to the Magistrate for fresh summoning order.

Dhooram Chaudhary Vs State of Up and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3506 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Dhooram Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gopal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

This Criminal Misc.Application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet submitted in N.C.R. No.15/2012 under section 127A(2) (wrongly mentioned as Section 129A) Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951 as well as further proceedings in Case No.2921/2012 (arising out of the Charge Sheet in the aforesaid N.C.R., (State vs. Dhooram Chaudhary) pending the court of Special Judge, M.P/M.L.A. Allahabad and further prayer is to stay the proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the N.C.R. was registered under section 127A(2) Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951 but the charge sheet has been submitted under section 129A of the aforesaid Act and there is no such type of section in the aforesaid Act. He further submitted that learned Magistrate has blindly taken congizance against the applicant under section 129A of Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951. The allegation made in the N.C.R. is more of political rivalry between the applicant and opposite party no.2 in which the allegation is being made alleging that the applicant found doing wall painting during election.

¶9

Keeping in view of the facts, the matter is remanded back to the concerned Magistrate while quashing the cogizance order dated 31.7.2012 to reconsider the matter and pass a fresh summoning order relying the materials on record collected by the police during the investigation within a period of eight weeks by a well reasoned order.

¶10

With the above observation this application is disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 25.2.2019 Rk

Dhooram Chaudhary v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhooram Chaudhary v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dheer Pal @ Dheeraj Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Yashoda Devi Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Smt. Renu Dhakar Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Smt. Nihala Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Akhilesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chetan @ Golu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.