Dismissed

Virendra Yadav and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Nov 2019A482/40424/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a charge-sheet dated 26.03.2019 relating to dispute over land, the court found no ground to quash proceedings due to evidence of demarcation and demolition of a wall by the applicants. The application was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing the charge-sheet and consequential proceedings refused and the application dismissed.

Virendra Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40424 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Virendra Yadav And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Harendra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing charge sheet dated 26.03.2019 as well as its consequential proceeding in criminal case no.5872 of 2019 (State Vs. Virendra and others) arising out of case crime no.0033 of 2019, under sections 147 and 427 IPC, P.S.Kotwali, District Mau, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. No offence is made out against them. False story is concocted by opposite party no.2 in order to implicate them. The plot of opposite party no.2 was not demarcated on 27.01.2014. One complaint was made by opposite party no.2. On his complaint a team of Naib Tehsildar and Revenue Inspector visited the spot on 31.01.2019 and also demarcated the disputed land. In the report of Revenue Officer, it has mentioned that opposite party no.2 has filed a false complaint. The possession of the applicant was not found on Gaon Sabha land and only for the purpose of harassment, the opposite party no.2 lodged false FIR.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. argued that during investigation, the investigating officer has recorded the statement of Sarvesh Kumar, Naib Tehsildar and Paras, Revenue Inspector. In the statement of above witnesses, it has come that the land of opposite party no.2 was demarcated on 27.01.2019. The investigating officer has submitted charge sheet against the applicants after collecting evidence. There is no ground to quash the charge sheet as well as the consequential proceeding of the case.

¶9

A perusal of record shows that opposite party no.2 has lodged an FIR under sections 147 and 427 IPC on 27.01.2019, mentioning therein that the land was demarcated by the revenue team on 27.01.2019. The opposite party no.2 was raising

¶10

construction on the demarcated area. The applicants reached there and demolished the wall of opposite party no.2. During investigation, the Investigation Office has also recorded the statement of Survesh Kumar, Naib Tehsildar and Paras, Revenue Inspector. In their statement, it came that land of opposite party no.2 was demarcated on 27.01.2019.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any good ground to quash the charge sheet and consequential proceeding of aforementioned case, therefore, prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused and the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed .

¶12

Order Date :- 16.11.2019

¶13

PKC

Virendra Yadav and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Yadav and 5 Others v. State of U.P. 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

Ravindra Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Bharat Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Nitin Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Gahan Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raju @ Rajesh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another