Dismissed

Jitendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 May 2023A482/18882/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge court disposed of the applicant's Section 482 Cr.P.C. application challenging a Charge Sheet and Cognizance Order in a corruption case. The prayer to prevent filing of charge sheet was refused, but the applicant was permitted to furnish bail bonds to be enlarged on bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash charge sheet refused. Applicant permitted to furnish bail bond and two sureties by 13.6.2023 to be enlarged on bail.

Jitendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:112103

¶2

Court No. - 49

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18882 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jitendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.

¶7

Perused the record.

¶8

This application under section 482 Cr.PC has been filed challenging the Charge Sheet No. 08 of 2023 dated 3.4.2023 submitted in Case Crime No. 46 of 2006 under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B/34 I.P.C. and Section 13 (2) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station-Sikandarpur, District-Ballia as well as the Cognizance Taking Order dated 26.4.2023 passed by Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) Ist, Varanasi in Special Trial No. 320 of 2023 (State of U.P. Vs. Kameshwar Rai and others).

¶9

At the very outset, it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. that coaccused namely (i) Rajeev Kumar Singh approached this Court by means of the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 16775 of 2023 (Rajeev Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P and another) but this Court declined to entertain the application vide order dated 5.5.2023. The same is accordingly reproduced hereinunder:-

¶10

" 1. Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.

¶11

2. Perused the record.

¶12

3. This application under section 482 Cr.PC has been filed challenging the Charge Sheet No. 9 of 2019 dated 10.02.2020 submitted in Case Crime No.42A of 2006 under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477a, 120B/34 I.P.C. and Section 13 (2) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police StationSukhpura, District-Ballia as well as the Cognizance Taking Order dated 31.05.2022 passed by Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) Ist Varanasi in Special Trial No. 632 of 2022 (State of U.P. Vs. Ram Murti and others) on the aforementioned charge-sheet.

¶13

4. At the very out set, the learned counsel for applicant has placed before the Court the order dated 24.02.2023 passed by His Lordship, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh in Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 19369 of 2020 (Arjun Ram Vs. State of U.P. and another) alongwith connected matters.

¶14

5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the issue involved in present application is similar and identical to the issue involved in aforementioned criminal misc. application alongwith connected applications. He has then invited the attention of Court to the recital contained in paragraph 23 of the judgement placed before this Court and on basis thereof, he pleads innocence of applicant. On the above premise, he submits that similar order be passed in the case of present applicant also.

¶15

6. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed this application. However, he could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant that case of present applicant is also covered by the judgement and order dated 24.02.2023 as noted above.

¶16

7. In view of above, prayer prayed for by means of present application is refused.

¶17

8. However, applicant is permitted to furnish his bail bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned by 24.05.2023, on which he shall be enlarged on bail.

¶18

9. With the aforesaid observation, this application is finally disposed of "

¶19

It is further submitted by the learned A.G.A. that another coaccused namely (ii) Rajesh Pandey approached this Court by means of the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 16778 of 2023 (Rajesh Pandey Vs. State of U.P and another), but this Court declined to entertain the application vide order dated 5.5.2023. The same is accordingly reproduced hereinunder:-

¶20

"1. Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.

¶21

2. Perused the record.

¶22

3. This application under section 482 Cr.PC has been filed challenging the Charge Sheet No. 9B of 2019 dated 14.05.2022 submitted in Case Crime No.42A of 2006 under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477a, 120B/34 I.P.C. and Section 13 (2) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police StationSukhpura, District-Ballia as well as the Cognizance Taking Order dated 18.06.2022 passed by Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) Ist Varanasi in Special Trial No. 632 of 2022 (State of U.P. Vs. Ram Murti and others) on the aforementioned charge-sheet.

¶23

¶24

2020 (Arjun Ram Vs. State of U.P. and another) alongwith connected matters.

¶25

¶26

¶27

7. In view of above, prayer prayed for by means ofpresent application is refused.

¶28

¶29

9. With the aforesaid observation, this application is finally disposed of"

¶30

In view of above, the prayer made for by means of present application is refused.

¶31

However, applicant is permitted to furnish his bail bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned by 13.6.2023, on which he shall be enlarged on bail.

¶32

With the aforesaid observation, this application is finally disposed of.

¶33

Order Date :- 22.5.2023 Aiman

¶34

Digitally signed by :- AIMAN FAROOQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jitendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra 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

Sparsh Bisht Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Dukhi Prasad Vs Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforecement

Rajesh Kumar Prajaptai Vs State of U.P.

Dharmveer Singh @ Dharmveer Singh Pundhir and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohit Pratap Vs Smt. Babali @ Priya

Indraveer Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and Another