Remanded

Arvind Phule v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2021A482/4749/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 Cr.P.C. application, the single-judge bench examined the propriety of the trial court taking cognizance via charge sheet versus complaint procedure under Section 506 IPC. The court set aside the cognizance order and remitted the matter for a fresh order following compliant procedural rules.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 09.06.2020 by the learned A.C.J.M., Sonbhadra is set aside and the matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate to pass a fresh order within two months.

Arvind Phule Vs State of U.P. and Another — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4749 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Arvind Phule Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed praying for quashing of charge sheet dated 12.11.2019 and cognizance order dated 9.6.2020 as well as the entire proceedings of Crl. Case No. 10284 of 2020 (State Vs. Upendra Gupta and anotehr), arising out of Case Crime No. 124 of 2019, under Sections- 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Obra, District- Sonbhadra, pending in the court of A.C.J.M. Sonbhadra.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present prosecution has arisen out of FIR. It is stated that the offence as alleged are non-cognizable and therefore the learned Magistrate could have taken cognizance in view of the explanation under Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C.

¶8

It is further stated that the only course open to the learned Magistrate was to have treated the case as a complaint case and to have proceeded with, in accordance with law accordingly.

¶9

Reliance has been placed on the decision of this Court dated 15.05.2018 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 5917 of 2006 wherein this Court has taken view that neither the charge sheet could have been submitted by the Investigating Officer nor the learned Magistrate could have taken cognizance on the same, treating it as a State case.

¶10

Learned AGA on the other hand submits that while the learned Magistrate may not have taken cognizance on the charge sheet treating it to be a State case. However, it was open to the learned Magistrate to follow the complaint case procedure.

¶11

Considering the above, no useful purpose would be in

¶12

keeping the present application pending any further. The order dated 09.06.2020 passed by the learned A.C.J.M., Sonbhadra is set aside and the matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate to pass a fresh order, strictly in accordance with law, keeping in mind the observations made above.

¶13

The aforesaid exercise may be concluded as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, the present application is disposed of .

¶15

Order Date :- 13.9.2021

¶16

RPD

Arvind Phule v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Phule 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

Manjesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Narendra @ Ravindra Kumar and 7 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Sushil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Ansar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Kumar Vs State of Up and Another

Rajesh Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another