Dismissed

Mani Bhushan Singh v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2022A482/2235/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash criminal proceedings. Holding that the submissions raised were matters of disputed defence, the court ruled it cannot appraise evidence or determine facts at this stage, noting a prima facie case exists based on the FIR and charge sheet.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings for offences under sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC were not quashed and the application was dismissed.

Mani Bhushan Singh Vs State of U.P.and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2235 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mani Bhushan Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Girish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Girish Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.

¶6

Perused the record.

¶7

This application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the charge sheet dated 25.2.2020 submitted in Case Crime No. 343 of 2019, under sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Bariya, District Ballia, Cognizance Taking Order/Summoning Order dated 27.9.2021, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate in consequential Criminal Case No. 6896 of 2021 (State Vs. Shashi Bhushan Singh) under sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Bariya, District Ballia as well as entire proceeding of aforementioned criminal case now pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Ballia.

¶8

Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in aforementioned case crime number. Applicant was not present at the time of occurrence. It is next contended that applicant who is brother of defendant (opposite party) in civil proceedings has been falsely implicated as part of presure tactic to gain mileage in the civil dispute pending between the parties.

¶9

Applicant is a fourth class employee in Punjab National Bank. As such, present criminal proceedings are not only malicious but also an abuse of process of Court and are liable to be quashed by this Court.

¶10

It is next contended by learned counsel for applicant that independent witnesses examined by Investigating Officer under section 161 Cr.P.C have not implicated present applicant in the crime in question. On the aforesaid premise, it is urged that present application is liable to be allowed.

¶11

Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed this application. He submits that after registration of F.I.R. dated 12.12.2019, Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of

¶12

same in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. The statements of first informant and other witnesses was recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. From the perusal of statements of first informant, complicity of first informant is established. Learned A.G.A. further contends that after completion of statutory investigation of aforesaid case crime number, Investigating Officer, on the basis of statement of witnesses so examined and other material collected by him, came to the conclusion that complicity of present applicant in the crime in question is established. Accordingly, Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet dated 25.5.2020. Perusal of charge-sheet goes to show that 8 prosecution witnesses have been nominated. It is thus urged that it cannot be said at this stage that prosecution story is false or there is no material to support the prosecution story.

¶13

Having heard learned counsel for applicants, learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relate to the disputed defence of the applicant, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.PC. This Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot appraise or appreciate evidence, as such an exercise can be undertaken only by trial court. At this stage only prime facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Supreme Court in R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.)283.

¶14

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

¶15

It is accordingly dismissed.

¶16

Order Date :- 13.7.2022 Arshad

¶17

Digitally signed by ARSHAD MAHMOOD Date: 2022.07.14 17:51:22 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mani Bhushan Singh v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mani Bhushan Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muzaffar Vs State of U.P.

Nasim Vs State of U.P. and Another

Farman Ilahi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Smt. Pooja Rani Saraswat Vs State of U.P.and Another

Karan Singh Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay and 3 Others Vs State of U.P and Another