In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash charges under SC/ST Act and IPC, the Court observed that the matter involved disputed facts requiring evidence appreciation, which exceeded the scope of Section 482 powers.
None. Applicants granted liberty to move a discharge application at the appropriate stage.
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. - 5525 of 2021 Applicant :- Sanjai And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mishra,Ramesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Satish Kumar Shukla holding brief of Sri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Arvind Kumar, learned AGA appearing for the State-opposite party.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking to quash the impugned chargesheet no.150/20, dated 31.12.2020 arising out of case crime no.136 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504 IPC and Section 3(1) (s), 3(2) (va) SC/ST Act, police station- Pannuganj, District Sonbhadra as well as entire proceedings of Case No.31 of 2021 (State Vs. Sanjai and Others) pending before Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Sonbhadra.
Learned counsel for the applicants has sought to assail the proceedings by referring to the factual aspects of the matter and the defence, which is sought to be set up on behalf of the applicants.
Learned AGA submits that the aforesaid contention would relate to disputed questions of fact and would require appreciation of evidence, which would be beyond the scope and purview of the powers to be exercised under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicants does not dispute the aforesaid legal position and fairly submits that he does not wish to press the relief, as prayed for, in the application. He further states that the applicants are already on bail and they may be granted liberty to move a discharge application.
It goes without saying that the discharge is a valuable right and an application seeking discharge may be moved by the applicants at the appropriate stage.
Subject to the aforesaid observation, the application stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021/Nitendra
(Dr. Y.K. Srivastava, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should exercise its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the chargesheet and proceedings given that the matter involves disputed questions of fact.
Whether the applicant, having already been granted bail, is entitled to a discharge application at this stage.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sanjai and 3 Others
State of U.P.
Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
