Single judge quashed Section 482 Cr.P.C. Application. Court held prima facie cognizable offence was made out based on charge sheet witnesses despite incomplete injury disclosures. Application dismissed.
Application quashing summoning and cognizance orders dismissed.
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. - 89
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6858 of 2022
Applicant :- Shiv Charan And 9 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Dubey,Vipul Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Heard Sri Vipul Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants and Dr. S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I, for the State.
The instant application has been moved on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 14.12.2021 and cognizance order dated 6.11.2020 arising out of charge sheet dated 2.8.2020 passed in Case No. 7232 of 2021, under Sections 147, 149, 188, 269, 308, 323, 324 and 504 IPC and Section 3 Epidemic Act, 1897 pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that in the present matter initially a NCR was lodged by opposite party no.2 but subsequently the basis of injury reports of alleged injured persons the case was converted into cognizable offence and FIR was registered under Section 323, 324 and 504 IPC and after investigation charge sheet was submitted against as many as 25 persons including applicants, who are ten in number.
Learned counsel for the applicants next submitted that injured persons of the present matter did not even
disclose the name of applicants no.2,4,6,8,9 and 10 and they only disclose the names of applicants no.1,3,5 and 7 and therefore, charge sheet at least filed against applicants no.2,4,6,8, 9 and 10 is bad. He further submitted that even from the perusal of the FIR and other material on record it appears that on the basis of general and omnibus allegation multiple persons have been roped in the present matter by opposite party no.2 which shows that the entire prosecution version narrated in the FIR and in the statement of witnesses is totally false but in spite of that charge sheet has been submitted against the applicants and cognizance has been taken by the court below and summons were issued to accused persons including applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that even from the perusal of cognizance and summoning order it appears that it is cryptic one and has been passed without application of mind and while issuing summons to accused persons including applicants, court below did not even disclose the complete names of the accused persons including applicants. Therefore, cognizance order dated 6.11.2020 is illegal.
Per contra, learned AGA submitted that there is specific allegation against the accused persons in the FIR and in the statement of injured persons that they simultaneously assaulted and due to their assault as many as six persons sustained injuries, therefore, at this stage it cannot be said that no prima facie
cognizable offence is made out against the accused persons including applicants.
He next submitted that although from the perusal of the statement of injured witnesses it appears that they did not disclose the names of applicants no.2,4,6,8,9 and 10 but charge sheet shows that there are as many as 16 witnesses out of which ten witnesses are the witnesses of fact and the statement of only witnesses no.1 to 6 has been annexed by applicants and the statement of witnesses no.7 to 10 have not been annexed along with the present applicant. Therefore, it cannot be said that these four witnesses also did not disclose the names of applicants no.2,4,6,8,9 and 10 and this fact shows that applicants tried to conceal the material facts and, therefore, on this ground alone the instant application is liable to be dismissed.
I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case.
From the perusal of the record it reveals that opposite party no.2 initially lodged a NCR in the present case but as there were number of injured persons, therefore, on the basis of injury reports, the instant matter converted into cognizable offence and formal FIR was lodged and after that investigation was conducted and during investigation the names of applicants were revealed and their complicity discloses.
Although from the perusal of statement of injured
persons it appears that they did not disclose the names of applicants no.2,4,6,8,9, and 10 but merely on that ground it cannot be said that no prima facie cognizable offence against them is made out as from the charge sheet it appears that there are several other witnesses and their statements have not been annexed by applicants along with the present application.
As from the perusal of the entire record of the case, it cannot be said that no prima facie cognizable offence is made out against the applicants. Therefore, I find no good ground to interfere at this stage as the law is settled that only in rarest of rare cases, this Court can exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
In view of the above, the instant application being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 23.9.2022 SKM
Digitally signed by SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.09.29 13:12:17 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to quash the summoning and cognizance orders in a criminal charge sheet filed against the applicants.
Shiv Charan And 9 Others
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
