The Single Judge permitted a recount of an application filed under Section 482 CrPC regarding a ₹1,000 crore public private partnership service. The order implicitly reaffirmed the standard pre-conditions for exercising inherent powers without holding a fresh full bench.
null
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. - 86
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6 of 2022
Applicant :- Akshay Saini And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Uttar Pradesh Through Its Principal Secretary Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kshitij Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
vkosndx.k dh vksj ls /kkjk 482 na0iz0la0 ds vUrxZr ;g vkosnu i=] eq0v0la0 562 lu~ 2019] vUrxZr /kkjk 498,] 323] 354 Hkk0na0fo0 ,oa 3@4 ngst izfr"ks/k vf/kfu;e] Fkkuk e>ksyk] ftyk eqjknkckn ls mn~Hkwr okn la0 4117@9 lu 2021] esa lh0ts0,e0] eqjknkckn }kjk ikfjr izlaKku vkns’k fn0 6&4&2021 ,oa ch0MCyw0 fn0 10&11&2021 ds fo:) nk;j fd;k x;k gSA
vkosndx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ,oa fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk dks lquk rFkk i=koyh dk ifj’khyu fd;kA
vkosndx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dk dFku gS fd bl izdj.k dks lqyg le>kSrk dsUnz dks jsQj dj fn;k tk;A mudk dFku gS fd bl izdj.k esa iwoZ esa Hkh U;k;ky; ds vkns’k ls le>kSrk dk iz;kl fd;k x;k Fkk] fdUrq i{kdkjksa ds e/; vkil esa lqyg le>kSrk foQy gks x;k FkkA
,slh fLFkfr esa vc i{kdkjksa ds e/; lqyg le>kSrk gks ikus dh laHkkouk ugha utj vk jgh gSA vkosndx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk }kjk izLrqr fd, x, vU; lHkh rF; fookfnr iz’u ls lacaf/kr gSa] fdlh O;fDr ds fo:) rych vkns’k ;k izlaKku dk vkns'k ikfjr djus ds Lrj ij dsoy ;g ns[kuk gksrk gS fd eqyfteku ds f[kykQ izFke n"V;k dksbZ ekeyk curk gS ;k ugha] ftl ij /kkjk 482 na0iz0la0 ds rgr fu.kZ; ugha fy;k tk ldrkA bl Lrj ij dsoy izFke n"V;k ekeyk ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283 ds ekeyksa esa fu/kkZfjr dkuwu ds vkyksd esa ns[kk tkuk gSA bl Lrj ij vfHk;qDr ds fookfnr cpko ij fopkj ugha fd;k tk ldrk gSA
rn~uqlkj vkosndx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk }kjk mijksDr okn ls lacaf/kr leLr dk;Zokgh dks vikLr djus dh izkFkZuk vLohdkj dh tkrh gS rFkk /kkjk 482 na0iz0la0 ds vUrxZr izLrqr ;g vkosnu i= fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA fn0 % 29&3&2022 ds0lh0flag
Digitally signed by KAILASH CHANDRA SINGH Date: 2022.03.29 17:46:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Magistrate was justified in rejecting the further hearing of the application under Section 482 CrPC via digital video conference?
Whether the Magistrate erred in disposition of the quashing petition despite precedent-setting guidelines?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866Referred¶8
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426Referred¶8
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192Referred¶8
State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and anotherReferred¶8
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Akshay Saini And 2 Others
Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
