The High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The court held that the delay of 8 years in filing was unexplained and the matter was barred by laches.
Application under Section 482 CrPC was dismissed on the ground of laches due to 8-year unexplained delay.
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. - 84
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9696 of 2022
Applicant :- Shripat Mall And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Baijant Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Heard Sri Rajendra Sharan Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Sri Baijant Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State and perused the record of the case.
By way of present application, applicants made prayer to quash the charge-sheet no. 115 of 2013 dated 19.05.2013 as well as cognizance order dated 26.05.2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 203 of 2013 and proceedings of Case No. 1609 of 2014, under Sections 379, 406, 504, 506, 420, 466, 468, 471, 120B IPC and Section 4/10 Indian Forest (Conservation) Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Kushinagar pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Kasia, Kushinagar.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that although FIR of the present case was filed against the applicants in the year 2013 and charge-sheet was also filed in the present matter in the same year but applicants could not become aware about the proceedings of the case and when they become aware about the proceedings of the case then they are now knocking the door of this Court by way of present application and they are challenging the entire proceedings pending against them. He further submitted that from the perusal of the FIR and other documents on record no prima facie cognizable offence is made out against the applicants and proceedings pending against the applicants is bad.
Per contra, learned AGA submitted that as applicants has knocked the door of this Court after about 8 years, therefore, on the ground of latches itself, the present application is liable to be dismissed as applicants failed to properly explained the latches of 8 years.
I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2013 and in the same year, after investigation, charge-sheet was submitted and thereafter in the year 2014 cognizance was taken and since then trial is pending before the court concerned and applicants did
not appear before the trial court and after 8 years they challenged the proceedings pending against them by way of present application although learned counsel for the applicants during the course of argument submitted that applicants could not become aware about the submission of charge-sheet against them in the present matter, therefore, they could not knocked the door of this Court earlier and when they came to know about the pendency of the present case they knocked the door by filing the present application, but argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicants is not supported by any pleadings and it is nowhere mentioned in the affidavit filed in the support of present application that what was the reason of delay of 8 years in knocking the door of this Court. As, applicants failed to explain the latches of 8 years and challenged the proceedings of charge-sheet after 8 years, therefore, on the ground of latches itself it cannot be entertained.
Accordingly, the present application is dismissed.
Order Date :- 15.7.2022 AK Pandey
Digitally signed by ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY Date: 2022.07.20 10:38:01 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an application under Section 482 CrPC filed after a delay of 8 years without explanation of laches can be entertained.
Shripat Mall And Another
Samir Jain
Anupam Kumar Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
