Dismissed

Tanuj Shivhare v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2021A482/6005/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant challenged the Magistrate’s order taking cognizance of offences under Sections 504, 506, and 406 IPC. The State argued that the charge-sheet for the first two offences was unchallenged and the third based on the police report, justifying jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; summons and cognizance upheld.

Tanuj Shivhare Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6005 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Tanuj Shivhare Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pandey Balkrishna Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,A.P.Singh,Sangam Lal Kesharwani

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Pandey Balkrishna, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging order dated 21.10.2019 passed by Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Complaint No.636 of 2018, (State Vs. Tanuj Shivhare), under Sections- 504, 506, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Sikandra, District- Agra whereby, court below has taken cognizance under Sections- 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. and consequently summoned applicant under aforesaid sections.

¶7

Record shows that informant/opposite party-2, Smt. Swati Jadaun lodged an F.I.R. dated 23.07.2018, which was registered as Case Crime No.0636 of 2018, under Sections- 504, 506, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Sikandra, District- Agra. In the aforesaid F.I.R., applicant- Tanuj Shivhare has been nominated as named accused whereas, 4-5 unknown persons have also been nominated as accused. Police upon completion of statutory investigation of aforesaid case crime number, submitted a charge-sheet dated 12.08.2019 whereby, applicant- Tanuj Shivhare was charge-sheeted under Sections- 504, 506 I.P.C. At this juncture, informant/opposite party-2 filed an application for taking cognizance under Sections- 406 and 411 I.P.C. Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra upon consideration of material on record came to the conclusion that on the basis of material available on record offence under Section 406 I.P.C. is also made out against applicant. Consequently, by means of order dated 21.10.2019, court below took cognizance under Sections 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. and simultaneously summoned the applicant.

¶8

Feeling aggrieved by order dated 21.10.2019, applicant has now approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶9

At the very outset, learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection by submitting that the charge-sheet dated 12.08.2019

¶10

has not been challenged by applicant. Therefore, the cognizance taken by Magistrate under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. and consequential summoning of applicant under aforesaid sections cannot be challenged. It is next contended by learned A.G.A. that concerned Magistrate by means of impugned order has taken cognizance under Sections 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. on the basis of material on record. Admittedly, applicant had already been charge-sheeted under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. Cognizance with regard to an offence under Section 406 I.P.C. has been taken by concerned Magistrate on the basis of police report and documents accompanying the same. Therefore, cognizance so taken by Magistrate shall be deemed to be under Section 190(1) (b) Cr.P.C. As such no jurisdictional error has been committed by court below.

¶11

When confronted with above, learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same.

¶12

In view of above, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.

¶13

It is accordingly dismissed.

¶14

Order Date :- 16.7.2021 Saif

Tanuj Shivhare v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tanuj Shivhare 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

Ajeet Verma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amzad Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Swati @ Gulnar Rayeen and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohd. Shakir @ Shakir Ali and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Indira Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 2 Others

Man Singh @ Man Singh Baghel Vs State of U.P. and Another