The Court dismissed a petition seeking quashing of an FIR alleging serious injuries. Disciplinary proceedings against the SHO were quashed after an apology, as injuries were confirmed and Section 304 IPC was added.
Disproceedings against SHO dropped; petition dismissed; FIR not quashed.
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. - 33
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7167 of 2019
Petitioner :- Chhedi And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Mohammad Abbas Abdy,Ramesh Chandra Kushwaha
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the respondent nos. 1,2 and 3 and we have perused the record.
The instant petition seeks quashing of the first information report dated 15.1.2019 registered as case crime no. 0016 of 2019 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Mauaima, District- Prayagraj.
In paragraph no. 13 of the writ petition, the petitioners had stated that there is no medical report available on record to support the prosecution case.
In view of the averments, by order dated 25.3.2019 the Court required the learned A.G.A. to obtain instructions from the Police Station concerned and to produce the injury report, if any, fixing 1.4.2019.
On 1.4.2019 learned A.G.A. informed that despite communication of the order dated 25.3.2019 instructions have not been been provided.
On the said statement of the learned A.G.A. we directed the SHO, Mauaima to appear personally before this Court on 3.4.2019.
However, on 3.4.2019 the regular Court dealing with such matters was not available, therefore, the matter was transferred to Court No. 51.
On 3.4.2019 when the matter was taken up in Court No. 51, it appears that no one appeared from the Police Station concerned as directed by our order dated 1.4.2019, therefore, on 3.4.2019 the Court was inclined to pass the following order:-
"Today when the case has been taken up, we find that there is specific order on 1.4.2019, which reads as under:
"Learned A.G.A. has informed us that despite communication of the order dated 25.03.2019 to the SHO, Mauaima, District-Allahabad, the SHO is
not present with injury report, as directed by this Court.
Put up this matter day after tomorrow i.e. 03.04.2019. On the next date, the SHO, Mauaima shall be personally present before the Court. If he is not present on the next date, then disciplinary action shall be directed against him.
Let a copy of this order be provided to the learned A.G.A. by today itself. "
However, inspite of the said categorical order, we have been informed by the learned A.G.A. that the SHO, Mauaima, District Prayagraj is not present before this Court. Thus, it is apparent that the SHO, concerned is not appearing before this Court inspite of categorical and specific order being passed requiring his presence before this Court and thus the Court has been left with no option but to issue the following directions:-
(a) The S.S.P, Prayagraj is directed to ensure the presence of SHO, Mauaima, District Prayagraj before this Court/appropriate Court on 8.4.2019.
(b) In view of the earlier order passed by the Division Bench of this Court clearly observing that if he is not present on the next date, a disciplinary action shall be taken against him, the S.S.P., Allahabad will accordingly file a personal affidavit by the next date of listing i.e. 8.4.2019 as to what disciplinary action has been initiated against the SHO, Mauaima for his absence even today.
(c) List this case on 8.4.2019, on which date, the SHO, Mauaima will be personally present before this Court/appropriate Court alongwith his personal affidavit explaining as to why proceedings against him may not be drawn for committing gross contempt of the order passed by this Court and for gross dereliction of official duty and keeping in view his contemptuous conduct in not appearing before this Court inspite of repeated orders being passed.
(d) It is also made clear that even if on the next date of listing, the SHO, Mauaima is not present before this Court, the Court would be left with no option but to summon the S.S.P., Allahabad as well as I.G., Allahabad before this Court/appropriate Court itself.
Let a copy of this order be communicated to the offices of S.S.P., Prayagraj and I.G., Prayagraj through the office of Registrar General of this Court.
Let a copy of this order be provided to the office of the G.A. of this Court for necessary communication and compliance."
In compliance of the order dated 3.4.2019, the personal affidavit of S.S.P. Prayagraj and SHO, Mauaima has been filled.
In the affidavit it is stated that information of order dated 25.3.2019 was received on 31.3.2019 and upon information Vinay Singh was deputed to appear on 01.04.2019 but he got stuck in the traffic therefore reached late, by which time,
already 03.04.2019 was fixed. It is stated that complete information of the order dated 01.04.2019 was not available therefore for appearance on 3.4.3019 again Vinay Singh was deputed. It is stated that on 3.4.2019, Court No. 33 was not sitting and matter was transferred to Court No. 51. It is stated that Vinay Singh kept waiting in Court No. 33 and could not appear when matter was taken in Court No. 51 on 3.4.2019.
The SHO, Mauaima as well as S.S. P., Prayagraj both have tendered unconditional apology.
In the personal affidavit of S.H.O. Mauaima the injury report of the two victims, who suffered injuries, have been annexed, which discloses that one of the victims had died. As a result, charge of Section 304 I.P.C was added.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as explanations offered in the affidavits of SHO, Mauaima and S.S.P., Prayagrag we drop the proceedings against SHO, Mauaima.
As material brought on record discloses that serious injuries were sustained by the victims, no case is made out for quashing the F.I.R.
The petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 8.4.2019 A. Pt. Singh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the First Information Report registration can be quashed in view of the medical reports submitted by the respondents.
Whether disciplinary proceedings against the Station House Officer for absence should be continued.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Chhedi And 4 Others
State Of U.P.
Manoj Misra
Suresh Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
