An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the summons and process against an absconding applicant in a gang rape case was dismissed due to lack of good grounds for interference.
The application for quashing the impugned orders was dismissed as it has no force.
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. - 66
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 47113 of 2019
Applicant :- Ummed Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA.
The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 15.11.2018 and order of proceeding u/s 82 Cr.P.C. dated 20.9.2019 as well as issued on subsequent dates by court of learned Second Additional Session Judge, Firozabad in S.S.T. No. 686 of 2018 (State vs. Bharat @ Vishnu and others) u/s 376(Gh) IPC and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, P.S. Pachokhara, District Firozabad.
Learned counsel has argued that the trial court has not passed the order summoning the applicant u/s 319 Cr.P.C. within the parameter laid down by the Constitution Bench in the case of Hardeep Singh; the court below has failed to consider that the prosecutrix in her deposition before the court has not made any allegation of rape against the applicant and the prosecutrix has stated that the applicant and co-accused Toni had closed the door of the room where the prosecutrix was gang raped by the other accused. He has further argued that summoning order was passed on 15.11.2018 and the applicant had no knowledge about the same and the court has illegally issued process u/s 82 Cr.P.C.
Per contra learned AGA has strongly opposed the prayer for quashing the impugned order and submitted that the prosecutrix has levelled allegation that he assisted the main accused and squarely a case of gang rape is made out as envisaged u/s 376-D IPC.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, especially keeping in view that the applicant was summoned vide order dated 15.11.2018 and he remained absconding, N.B.W. and process u/s 82 Cr.P.C. have also been issued and the applicant has not surrendered till date, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the order.
The present application has no force and the same is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019 Dhirendra/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can quash the order summoning the applicant and proceeding under Section 82 Cr.P.C. in a gang rape case.
Whether the applicant has any ground to interfere with the order passed by the trial court despite being absconding.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hardeep SinghExplained¶7
Hardeep Singh
6 provisions across 3 enactments
Ummed
Ragul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
