In an application seeking quashing of the charge sheet and setting aside the summoning order, the court held that the applicant actively participated in the incident with common intention to cause injury, making further investigation necessary.
None granted; application rejected.
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. - 91
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12364 of 2022
Applicant :- Vijay Giri And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shree Prakash Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Heard Sri Shree Prakash Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ravi Kant Kushwaha learned AGA for the State-respondent.
By way of filing application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant prays for quashing the charge sheet dated 4.11.2020 as well as set aside the cognizance/summoning order dated 1.12.2020, issued by the Judicial Magistrate-II, Bhadohi at Gyanpur in case No. 4312 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504 IPC arising out of case crime No. 117 of 2020, P.S. Koirauna, Distirct Bhadohi.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicants have falsely been implicated in the present case by the opposite party No. 2 and there is specific allegation only against the coaccused Sandeep Giri to inflict knife blow upon the injured. He further submitted that even charge sheet against the applicants has been filed only under Sections 323, 504 IPC and from the perusal of the FIR and the statements of witnesses including injured witness, it appears that main accused in the present case is Sandeep Giri and applicants have been implicated in the present case only due to reason that they are family members of co-accused Sandeep Giri and without any proper investigation, charge sheet in the present case has been filed against the applicants too.
Per contra, learned AGA submitted that in the FIR and in the statement of the witnesses, there is a specific allegation that applicants also gave lathi blow to the injured. He further submitted that applicants did not even annexed the injury report of the injured. He further submitted that the charge sheet against the co-accused Sandeep Giri has been filed under Sections 323, 504, 307 IPC and as the offence against the applicant was of only Sections 323, 504 IPC, therefore, Investigating Officer only under those Sections submitted charge sheet against the applicants and there is no illegality in the impugned charge sheet, therefore, the present application is liable to be dismissed.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record of the case.
From the perusal of the FIR, statement of the injured and the opposite party no. 2, it is apparent that applicants were not only present at spot but they also actively participated in the incident and they also gave lathi blow to the injured. Further, co-accused Sandeep Giri in the incident, in the meantime, inflicted knife injury on the neck of the injured. From the perusal of the FIR and the statements, complicity of the applicants is apparent and it appears that there was also common intention of applicants alongwith co-accused Sandeep Giri to cause injury to the injured. As, prima facie, offence under Sections 323, 504 and 34 IPC is made out against the applicants, therefore, present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, rejected .
Order Date :- 25.5.2022 Ankita
Digitally signed by ANKITA SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.06.14 13:32:13 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the charge sheet against the applicant requires quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vijay Giri
State of U.P.
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
