Partly allowed

Kamlesh Maurya and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2021A482/20019/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application under s. 482 Cr.P.C. sought to quash a charge sheet and cognizance order. The court set aside the order against one accused, Kalawati, who was not named in the FIR and had no role assigned by witnesses, but dismissed the application against the others.

What did the court decide?

Order of taking cognizance set aside for accused Kalawati; application dismissed for other accused.

Kamlesh Maurya and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20019 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Kamlesh Maurya And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Tiwari,Girish Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶6

The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of Kamesh Maurya, Kalawati, Raj Kumar and Raju Maurya with the prayer to quash the charge sheet no. 195 of 2020 dated 9.2.2020 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 23.10.2020 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra in Criminal Case No. 9746 of 2020 (State Vs. Kamlesh Maurya and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 252 of 2020 under sections 323,504,506 I.P.C, P.S. Robertsganj, District-Sonbhadra.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the FIR of the accused is highly belated. No cognizance has been made out from the allegations made in the FIR and no role has been assigned to the applicant accused Kalawati who is also not named in the FIR.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer seeking to quash the charge sheet and taking cognizance of the charge sheet on the ground that from the evidence collected by the Investigating Officer the charge sheet has rightly been filed.

¶9

From the perusal of the FIR it is found that more accused Priyanka, Kamlesh, Raj Kumar and Raju Maurya have been named in the FIR and the charge sheet has been filed after conclusion of the investigation by the Investigating Officer against the accused Kamlesh Maurya, Raj Kumar, Raju Maurya and Kalawati.

¶10

The statement of informant Kalaish Mani is the annexure-3 to the affidavit. In her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. says that on 30.1.2020 at 5 p.m. evening Kamlesh and her both sons Raju Maurya and Raj Kumar had beaten her on the same date. In the night at 8:15 p.m. Raju Maurya, Raj Kumar, Priyanka and Kamlesh intruded in her house and begun to beat her and her children.

¶11

Km. Jyoti is the daughter of informant and is the eye-witness of

¶12

the occurrence also corroborated the statement of the informant. The independent witness of the occurrence Ram Raj also corroborated the statement of the informant injured. In the Statement of Ram Prasad and Indu Kala the name of Kalawati came into light only to the extent that the dispute was also with Kalawati.

¶13

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants that no cognizable offence is made out is not sustainable in law, since the offence under section 506 IPC is a congnizable offence. So far as the role of applicant accused Kalawati is concerned, not named in the FIR and even the informant injured and the eyewitness Km. Jyoti have not assigned any role to Kalawati in the alleged occurrence.

¶14

So far as the statement of Ram Prasad and Indu Kala is concerned, in their statement also no specific role of committing offence has been assigned to Kalawati, as such, to the extent of applicant accused Kalawati the order of taking cognizance of the accused deserves to be set aside and for the rest of the accused, the same needs no interference.

¶15

Accordingly, this application is hereby allowed to the extent of applicant accused Kalawati and the impugned order is set aside and for the rest of the accused namely Kamesh Maurya Raj Kumar and Raju Maurya the application is dismissed.

¶16

Order Date :- 5.1.2021 SKS

Kamlesh Maurya and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlesh Maurya 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

Deepak Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Chandrabhushan Verma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dori Lal Nishad @ Hori Lal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raghavendra Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satyaprakash Paswan Vs State of U.P. and an 3OTHERS