Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashal of proceedings was dismissed as the applicant failed to dispute factual aspects and submitted to trial court's jurisdiction.
Application dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5026 of 2021 Applicant :- Bahadur Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Siya Ram Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Siya Ram Verma, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Pankaj Saxena, learned AGA-I appearing for the Stateopposite party.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking to quash the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No.316 of 2014 (State Vs. Bahadur), Case Crime No.383 of 2013, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Sachendi, District Kanpur Nagar, pending before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.25, Kanpur Nagar.
Counsel for the applicants has sought to refer to the factual aspects of the matter and the defence which is to be set up on behalf of the applicants before the trial court.
Learned AGA points out that the proceedings in the present case were initiated pursuant to an F.I.R. dated 17.08.2013 and thereafter the charge sheet was filed on 17.12.2013 whereupon cognizance was taken on 19.03.2014 and thereafter the trial has proceeded and presently it is at the stage of evidence and as such whatever defence is sought to be raised on behalf of the applicants may be pressed before the trial judge.
Learned counsel for the applicants does not dispute the fact that this Court in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. would usually not enter into the disputed questions of fact nor would it go into the questions relating to appreciation of evidence. He fairly submits that in the circumstances he does not wish to press the reliefs as prayed for in the present application and that the applicants would submit to the jurisdiction of the court below and apply for bail.
In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present application in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The present application stands accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 16.7.2021/Shahroz
(Dr. Y.K. Srivastava,J.)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bahadur Singh And Another
Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
