Rajesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

Rajesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition finally disposed of with directions: petitioner may file a discharge application before the Court below within 15 days of receipt of certified copy, to be decided expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within four months; failing which the benefit of the order shall not be available.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Gangster Case No. 165 of 2001 (under Sections 395, 412 IPC, Section 145 Railway Act and Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act), arising out of Case Crime No. 194 of 2000, should be quashed, in view of the petitioner's acquittal in Case Crime No. 194 of 2000 and the absence of his name from the gang chart.

Court's answer

If the petitioner moves an appropriate application for discharge before the concerned Court below within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law, preferably within a period of four months thereafter.

Ratio / Principle

If no such discharge application is filed within the prescribed period of fifteen days from receipt of the certified copy of the order, the benefit of the present order shall not be available to the applicant.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Gangster Case No. 165 of 2001 (Sections 395, 412 IPC, Section 145 Railway Act, Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act), arising out of Case Crime No. 194 of 2000, P.S. G.R.P. Barabanki. Counsel for the applicant pointed out that the applicant had already been acquitted in Case Crime No. 194 of 2000 under Sections 395/412 IPC vide judgment dated 01.12.2004, that a subsequent gang chart named three persons but not the applicant, and that a separate charge-sheet was thereafter filed under the same crime number under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act with Section 145 Railway Act added. Notably, in para 12 of its Counter Affidavit the State itself admitted that, no gang chart having been preferred against the petitioner and he having been acquitted, the case under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act was not sustainable in the eyes of law. The Court did not decide the quashing prayer on merits; after counsel prayed for liberty, the Court directed that if the petitioner moves an appropriate discharge application before the Court below within fifteen days of receipt of a certified copy of the order, it shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law, preferably within four months; if no such application is filed, the benefit of the order shall not enure to the applicant. Petition finally disposed of (order dated 2.3.2022).

Court No. - 13

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4138 of 2009

Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar,Farooq Ayoob Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

The present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing the entire proceedings of Gangster Case No. 165 of 2001 arising out of Case Crime No.194 of 2000 under Sections 395, 412 Indian Penal Code, Section 145 Railway Act and Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act, Police Station G.R.P. Barabanki, District Barabanki.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in Case Crime No. 194 of 2000, under Sections 395/412 I.P.C. the petitioner has already been acquitted vide judgment dated 01.12.2004 (Annexure No. 45). In respect of this very crime a gang chart was also prepared subsequently (Annexure No. 6) against three persons but the name of the applicant/petitioner does not find place in the gang chart. It appears that subsequently, the police in order to harass the petitioner filed a separate charge sheet under same crime number under Section 3 (1) U.P. Gangster Act and added one more Section 145 Railway Act which pertains to Dacoity/loot of Railway property. As stated above, the petitioner has already been acquitted of the charges of same dacoity under the relevant sections of Indian Penal Code.

Learned A.G.A. has submitted that in view of the specific pleading by the State in para 12 of the Counter Affidavit the

case under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Relevant para 12 of the Counter Affidavit is extracted below:-

"That it is most humbly submitted that since no gang chart was preferred against the petitioner and since he has been acquitted in Case Crime No.194 of 2000 vide order dated 01.12.2004, therefore, the case under Section 3(1) U.P.Gangster Act is not sustainable in the eyes of law."

After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that he may be permitted to file discharge application before the trial court and the same may be directed to be decided expeditiously.

In view of the above, it is provided that in case, the petitioner moves an appropriate application for discharge before the concerned Court below within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law, by the concerned Court below preferably within a period of four months, thereafter.

In case no such application is filed within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, as prescribed above, the benefit of present order shall not be available to the applicant.

With the aforesaid directions, this petition is finally disposed of.

Order Date :- 2.3.2022 Madhu

Digitally signed by MADHU KUMARI Date: 2022.03.05 10:43:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench