Allowed

Sri Krishna @ Krishnakant and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2021A482/18022/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, while disposing of an application for leave to file a Second Appeal under Section 482 CrPC, directed that the victim's right to cross-examination be respected according to law, allowing for evidence recording where warranted by the legal proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Leave to file Second Appeal allowed; Magistrate directed to record cross-examination evidence.

Sri Krishna @ Krishnakant and 2 Others Vs State… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18022 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sri Krishna @ Krishnakant And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- P.K. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

vkosndx.k dh vksj ls /kkjk 482 na0iz0la0 ds vUrxZr ;g vkosnu i=] eq0v0la0 292 lu 2020] vUrxZr /kkjk 392] 302 Hkk0na0fo0] Fkkuk vkSjS;k] ftyk vkSjS;k ls mn~Hkwr Lisa’ky dsl ua0 157 lu 2021 esa ,fM’kuy ls’kUl tt@ Lis’ky tt] Mh0,0,0 ,sDV] dksVZ uya0 1] vkSjS;k }kjk ikfjr vkns’k fn0 19&02&2021 ds fo:) nk;j fd;k x;k gSA

¶6

vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ,oa fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk dks lquk rFkk i=koyh dk ifj’khyu fd;kA

¶7

vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dk dFku gS fd vkosnd ds fo:) xyr izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ vafdr djk;h x;h gS rFkk izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa fy[kk;h x;h ckrsa fujk/kkj gSa] vkosnd ds fo:) mijksDr /kkjkvksa dk dksbZ vijk/k ugha curk gSA mudk ;g Hkh dFku gS fd og izkFkZuk [k.M esa dh xbZ vU; izkFkZukvksa ij ncko ugha Mkyuk pkgrs gSa] cfYd voj U;k;ky; esa mUekspu izkFkZuk i= nkf[ky djus dh vuqefr pkgrs gSa rFkk muds }kjk nkf[ky fd, x, mUekspu izkFkZuk i= dk fuLrkj.k djus dk] lacaf/kr voj U;k;ky; dks funsZ’k fn;k tk;A

¶8

eSaus mHk;i{k ds fo}ku vf/koDrkvksa ds rdksZ ij fopkj fd;kA

¶9

mHk; i{k ds fo}ku vf/koDrkvksa ds rdksZ ij fopkjksijkUr ,oa vfHkys[k ds voyksdu ls bl Lrj ij ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk gS fd vkosnd ds f[kykQ mijksDr /kkjkvksa ds vUrxZr dksbZ vijk/k xfBr ugha gksrk gSA vkosnd dh vksj ls tks rdZ izLrqr fd, x, gSa os fookfnr rkfF;d iz’u ls lacaf/kr gSa] ftuds fo"k; esa bl U;k;ky; }kjk /kkjk 482 na0iz0la0 ds vkosnu i= ij dksbZ QSlyk nsuk laHko ugha gS] pwWfd mDr rkfF;d iz’uksa dk fofu’p; fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk gh lk{; vkus ds ckn fd;k tk ldrk gSA bl laca/k esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283 esa fn, x, fu.kZ;ksa esa ;g vo/kkfjr fd;k x;k gS fd bl Lrj ij dsoy izFke n`"V;k gh dsl ns[kk tkuk gSA eqyfteku dk tks fookfnr cpko dFku gS ml ij bl Lrj ij fopkj ugha fd;k tk ldrk gSA rn~uqlkj ;g vkosnu i= cyghu gS vkSj fujLr fd, tkus ;ksX; gSA

¶10

gkyWkfd ;fn vkosnd vkt ls 1 ekg dh le;kof/k esa] lEcfU/kr v/khuLFk U;k;ky; ds le{k bl vkns'k dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi ds lkFk mUekspu izkFkZuki= nkf[ky djrk gS rks lacaf/kr U;k;ky; }kjk mHk; i{k dks lqudj] U;k;ksfpr vkns'k ds ek/;e ls mldk fuLrkj.k /kkjk 244 na0iz0la0 ds vUrxZr miyC/k lk{; ds vk/kkj ij izkFkfedrk ds vk/kkj ij 'kh/kzrkiwoZd fd;k tk;A ;fn v/khuLFk U;k;ky; vkosnd ds fo:) vkjksi fojfpr djus dk fu.kZ; ysrk gS rks ml fLFkfr esa og vkjksi fojfpr fd, tkus dh frfFk ij vkosnd dks O;fDrxr :i ls mifLFkr gksus ds fy, funsZf'kr dj ldrk gS vkSj ml frfFk ij mlls tekurukes eWkx ldrk gSA

¶11

vkt ls 30 fnu ds vUnj vFkok vkosnd ds lEcfU/kr voj U;k;ky; ds le{k mifLFkr [email protected] djds fueqZfDr vkosnu i= izLrqr djus esa] tks Hkh igys gks] vkosnd ds fo:) mijksDr okn dh dk;Zokgh LFkfxr jgsxhA fdUrq ;fn vkosnd dh vksj ls 30 fnu ds vUnj voj U;k;ky; ds le{k mifLFkr gksdj fueqZfDr izkFkZuk i= izLrqr ugha fd;k tkrk rks ;g vkns’k Lor% fu"izHkkoh le>k tk;A

¶12

mDr funsZ'kksa ds lkFk ;g izkFkZuki= vfUre :i ls fuLrkfjr fd;k tkrk gSA fn0 % 6&12&2021 ds0lh0flag

¶13

2 of 2

Sri Krishna @ Krishnakant and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Krishna @ Krishnakant and 2 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Har Narayan Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tinku and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajendra Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. and Others

Wahid Beg Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Kumar @ Bhola and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another