Allowed

Haji Sahid and 3 others v. State of U.P. and another

Allahabad HC18 Jun 2019CRLR/2367/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court set aside the order rejecting the discharge application and posting the case for framing charges. The matter was remitted to the trial court to consider all aspects of the case, including medical reports, within three months.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 24.05.2019 quashed; matter remitted to trial court to pass appropriate order within three months considering all aspects of the case.

Haji Sahid and 3 others Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2367 of 2019

¶3

Revisionist :- Haji Sahid And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Brijesh Kumar Pandey,Shri Saghir Ahmad(Senior Advocate) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Mohd. Belal, learned counsel on behalf of of opposite party no. 2, is taken on record.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of revisionists, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shri Saghir Ahmad (Senior Advocate) for the revisionists, Sri Mohd. Belal, learned counsel on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State.

¶8

The present revision has been filed against the order dated 24.05.2019 i.e., passed in connection with pending Session Trial No. 020 of 2019 State Vs. Haji Sahid and others, under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323 and 452 IPC, Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur by the learned Trial Court of Additional District and Session Judge, Fast Track Court, I, Hapur whereby the learned trial court vide its order dated 24.05.2019 has rejected the discharge application filed by revisionist and has posted 04.06.2019 for framing the charge against the revisionist.

¶9

The contention of learned counsel on behalf of revisionists is that even if the entire evidence (records and documents) collected by the Investigating Officer in terms of section 2(h) of Cr.P.C. for the purpose of investigation and submitted along with police report as defined under section 2(r) read with section 173(2) Cr.P.C. respectively shall be taken into consideration as a gospel truth. It is a pre-requisite condition in order to proceed, there must be a sufficient ground whereas in the present case there is no sufficient ground to proceed. The learned trial court in order to pass such impugned order taken into consideration the Medical Report of the two injured namely Ashraf and Mohd. Nazim but not specifically recorded the findings. It is further submitted that the learned trial court shall go beyond the records and documents available on records and passed the order without considering the merit of the case.

¶10

After hearing the learned counsel for the revisionists, learned A.G.A. and after perusing the material on record, without going into the merits of the case learned Court below is directed to pass appropriate order after taken into consideration all the aspects of the case in accordance with law.

¶11

In view of the above discussion the order dated 24.05.2019 i.e., passed in connection with pending Session Trial No. 020 of 2019 (State Vs. Haji Sahid and others), under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323 and 452 IPC, Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur by the learned Trial Court of Additional District and Session Judge, Fast Track Court, I, Hapur is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the concerned court below to pass appropriate order after taken into consideration all the aspects of the case in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before it.

¶12

With the above direction the present revision stands allowed.

¶13

Order Date :- 18.6.2019 Arti

Haji Sahid and 3 others v. State of U.P. and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haji Sahid and 3 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

Santosh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lala Nai @ Ravi Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Indraram Maurya and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and another

Mohd. Noman Siddiqui Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Madhav Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others