Dismissed

Jitendra Kumar @ Sohan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Apr 2022A482/8194/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the charge sheet, finding allegations supported by investigation material. No specific directions were issued on the pending bail prayer as Apex Court guidelines were deemed sufficient.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash charge sheet and cognizance order rejected; no specific directions issued for bail prayer.

Jitendra Kumar @ Sohan Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8194 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar @ Sohan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 26.05.2012 registered as Case No. 1474 of 2012 (State Vs. JItendra @ Sohan and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 107 of 2012 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 Police Station Kydganj, District Allahabad pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-5, District Allahabad as well as to quash the cognizance order dated 26.05.2012 passed in the aforesaid case.

¶7

On perusal of the record, the Court finds that the allegations made in the first information report disclose commission of a cognizable offence and those allegations have found support from the material collected during the course of investigation on the basis whereof the police has laid a charge sheet against the applicant.

¶8

At this Court, in exercise of its power under section 482 Cr.P.C., is not required to assess the correctness of the allegation and the reliability of the material collected during the course of investigation, the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the consequential proceeding is rejected.

¶9

At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant has so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicant and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicant by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶10

As the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021) has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and the statutory provisions

¶11

governing consideration in grant of bail, no specific direction need be issued by this Court as it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex court.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off. Order Date :- 8.4.2022 S.Ali

¶13

Digitally signed by SHAUKAT ALI Date: 2022.04.11 16:37:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jitendra Kumar @ Sohan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar @ Sohan 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

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Subhash Vs State of U.P.and Another

Sonu Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shailendra Kumar Siddharth @ Shailendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.and Another

Smt. Saroj Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Singh Vs State of U.P.