Dismissed

Aakash @ Aaka v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Sept 2021A482/14695/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge dismissed an applicant's Section 482 Cr.P.C. application seeking quashing of orders rejecting Section 311 and 164-A applications. The court held the applicant filed a writ petition with incorrect averments while a criminal case was pending, constituting misuse of legal provisions and lack of a clean hand, thus deserving no relief.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the impugned orders was dismissed due to misuse of legal provisions and lack of clean hand.

Aakash @ Aaka Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14695 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Aakash @ Aaka Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sarvesh Kumar Dubey

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned oder dated 16.3.2021 and 22.3.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (Rape and POCSO Act-2) Mainpuri in Special Sessions Trial No. 82 of 2017 under Sections 363, 366, 368 I.P.C. 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station- Kishni, DistrictMainpuri by which learned Court below dismised the applications under Sections 311 Cr.P.C. moved by the applicant and an application under Sections 164-A Cr.P.C. moved by the victim respectively with an alternative prayer to stay the further proceedings of the above mentioned case.

¶7

On 04.03.2021, applicant moved an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. before the learned trial Court with three specific questions desires to cross examine P.W.-2 afresh in the matter and the trial Court vide its order dated 16.3.2021 rejected the application observing that PW-2 has been cross examined by the counsel for accused at length and 7 prosecution witness have already been examined and the trial is ripe for final disposal, so there is no occasion to recall the PW-2. The said occurrence took place on 8.5.2017. The entire questions relates to the subsequent development during the period and least concerned with the disposal of the matter already pending before the Court.

¶8

It is relevant to quote the order of this Court where the accused jointly filed the writ petition numbered as Writ C No.21644 of 2020 which was disposed of vide order dated 10.12.2020:

¶9

"Since the writ petition is being decided at the stage of fresh motion itself and notice has not been issued to private respondent/s, as such, liberty is given to them to file a recall, in case any of the averments made in the writ petition are found to be incorrect, and this order shall stand automatically vacated, in case any First Information Report has been lodged in the matter".

¶10

Perusal of the order shows that knowingly the fact that a criminal case is pending against the applicant in a competent court the said application has been filed by the applicant with incorrect averments.

¶11

It clearly indicates that the applicant is misusing the legal provisions and not coming with the clean hand before the Court. Under the circumstances, it deserves no relief from the Court.

¶12

With the said observation, this application is finally disposed of. Order Date :- 1.9.2021 Fhd

Aakash @ Aaka v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aakash @ Aaka 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

Nanhey Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashwani @ Monu Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rafikuddin and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shivam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Vijay Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others