Brijendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 66

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4769 of 2020

Applicant :- Brijendra Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kamalesh Kumar Nishad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed for quashing the further proceedings of Criminal Case No.2308 of 2019 (State vs. Brijendra Pratap Singh), arising out of Case Crime No. 250 of 2011, u/s 447 I.P.C. and Section 11/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Madhogarh, District Jalaun, pending in the court of Special Judge P.C. Act, Lucknow as well as nonbailable warrant and proceeding under Section 82 Cr.P.C.

¶8

It is relevant to state here that the applicant was an ex-Member of Legislative Assembly in his constituency from 2002 to 2007. The allegation made in the first information report against him is that he had encroached the land of Gaon Sabha being Arazi No.1499 measuring .64 hectare and Arazi No.1052 measuring . 016 hectare and also being the sitting MLA and Manager of a Degree College he encroached upon the aforesaid property belonging to Gram Samaj and also raised certain constructions on it illegally. The applicant in order to have wrongful gain for himself in the capacity of a public servant has committed the offence. The Lokayukt, Uttar Pradesh also granted sanction for prosecution of the applicant and after thorough investigation charge-sheet bearing No.14 of 2013, under Sections 447 I.P.C. and 11/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was submitted against him before the Sessions Judge, Jalaun and the court took cognizance on 18.6.2013. The copy of the charge-sheet has been annexed as Annexure-3 to the affidavit. The aforesaid charge-sheet was challenged by the applicant in Criminal Misc. Application (U/s 482 Cr.P.C.) No.29515 of 2014 and the Court vide order dated 4.8.2014 recorded that from the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant and all the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by

¶9

this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Even though the prayer for quashing the proceedings was refused, the Court granted indulgence to the applicant to appear before the court concerned within three weeks from today and apply for bail and his prayer for bail shall be considered in view of the settled law laid down by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amarawati and another Versus State of U.P., reported in 2004 (57) ALR-290 (affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Kamlendra Pratap Singh Versus State of U.P. ) and the case of Sukhwant Singh Versus State of Punjab, 2009 Vol. VII, SCC 559 , after hearing the Public Prosecutor.

¶10

It appears that the applicant did not comply with the aforesaid order and remain absconding and thus the concerned court issued non-bailable warrant against the applicant vide order dated 3.3.2017. The applicant again filed a Criminal Misc. Application (U/s 482 Cr.P.C.) No.12505 of 2017 with a prayer for quashing the non-bailable warrant issued on 3.3.2017. In the said application, the prayer for quashing the non-bailable warrant was refused and the applicant was again given opportunity to approach the concerned court within 30 days and move an application for recalling the non-bailable warrant which shall be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law or in case, the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from that date and applies for bail, his prayer for bail may be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. (supra) as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. (supra). The Court also directed that no coercive action be taken against the applicant. The applicant being influential political person remained recalcitrant as ever and still did not comply with the aforesaid order. It appears from the petition that since the applicant is an ex-MLA, the case was transferred to Special Judge, P.C. Act, Lucknow dealing with MP/MLA cases. As the applicant did not appear even before the Special Judge, the court issued non-bailable warrant as well as process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. which is under challenge in the present application.

¶11

At the very outset, it is relevant to note that the applicant has though annexed the order passed in Criminal Misc. Application (U/s 482 Cr.P.C.) No.12505 of 2017, however, suppressed the fact that he had already approached the Court for quashing of the charge-sheet in Criminal Misc. Application (U/s 482 Cr.P.C.) NO. 29515 of 2014. Besides it, in Para 2 of the affidavit filed in support of the present application it is stated "that this is the first Criminal Misc. Application under Section

¶12

482 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant before this Hon'ble court for quashing the proceeding of Criminal Case No.2308 of 2019 (State vs. Brijendra Pratap Singh), arising out of Case Crime No. 250 of 2011, under Section 447 I.P.C. and Section 11/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 at Police StationMadhogarh, District- Jalaun, pending in the court of Special Judge P.C. Act, Lucknow as well as Non Bailable Warrant and 82 Cr.P.C. proceedings against the applicant and no other application/petition has earlier been filed or pending before this Hon'ble Court or its Lucknow Bench for the same cause of action."

¶13

From the aforesaid facts, it is abundantly clear that the applicant is absconding for the past seven years and has abused the process of the Court and by misrepresentation and suppression of fact he has again approached this Court for quashing of the proceedings.

¶14

Since, the Court in Criminal Misc. Application (U/s 482 Cr.P.C.) No.29515 of 2014 has already recorded a finding that prima facie offence is made out against the applicant, I am not inclined to go through all over again the evidence/material against the applicant. I may record that it is well settled that the second application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is also maintainable only under the change circumstances after rejection of first application, however, in the present case the applicant has suppressed the rejection of the first application and thereafter challenged the non-bailable warrant issued against him and still did not comply with the orders of the Court to appear before the concerned court and apply for bail.

¶15

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is bereft of merits and the same is, accordingly, dismissed .

¶16

I may record that there is no fault of counsel of the applicant, inasmuch as, the affidavit in support of present application has been filed by one Ram Kumar, S/o Devi Lal and in the supplementary affidavit filed today the deponent is the cousin brother and Pariokar of the applicant. It appears that the rejection of first application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was not disclosed to the counsel for the applicant and thus he has only annexed the details of the order passed in Criminal Misc. Application (U/s 482 Cr.P.C.) No.12505 of 2017.

¶17

As the applicant has wasted the Court's and litigant's precious time being an Ex-public servant, I deem it fit to impose a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on the applicant which shall be deposited by the applicant within four weeks from today and in the case of default the same shall be recovered from him as arrears of land

¶18

revenue. The amount so realized shall be deposited in the head of ' Legal Aid Services Authority, High Court, Allahabad '.

¶19

The conduct of the applicant is not above par that he has been an Ex-MLA and remained absconding for about sever years on account of which the trial against him is held up. The court concerned is hereby directed to ensure that the applicant is arrested within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order so that he can be put to trial.

¶20

Office is directed to communicate the order to the Special Judge, MP/MLA Anti Corruption Act, Lucknow forthwith.

¶21

Order Date :- 25.2.2020 Vikas

Brijendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brijendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilavar and Another Vs State of U.P and 2 Others

Pyaare Lal Vs State of U.P.

Kiran Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Bhartiya @ Sanjeev Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Dr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendra Singh Yadav @ Shyam Bihari Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another