Dismissed

Munna Lal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2023A482/20945/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that an applicant cannot file a second application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. assailing a summoning order and bailable warrant when the entire criminal proceeding is already challenged in a connected application before the same Court. Accordingly, the instant application was dismissed as misconceived.

What did the court decide?

Instant application dismissed as misconceived and devoid of merits.

Munna Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166706

¶2

Court No. - 90

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20945 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Munna Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shahabuddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

¶6

The present applicant has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. assailing the summoning order dated 16.03.2023 and bailable warrant dated 01.04.2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate in Case No. 1830 of 2019.

¶7

Perusal of record reveals that on complaint moved on behalf of opposite party no. 2, process has been issued by the Civil Judge (Junior Division)FTC, Pilibhit in Case No. 148, under Section 376/511 I.P.C., vide order dated 28.06.2018. Having been aggrieved against the said order, present applicant (accused) has approached to this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., being Application No. 28273 of 2018 (Munna Lal vs. State of U.P. and others). This Court, vide order dated 28.08.2018, has granted interim relief staying the further proceeding in the complaint case in pursuance of the summoning order dated 28.06.2018. During pendency of the instant application, learned trial court has passed the fresh summoning order dated 16.03.2023 and issued bailable warrant dated 01.04.2023 in light of the dictum of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited and Another vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2018) 16 SCC 299 . Consequently, the applicant has taken second attempt by way of moving instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. assailing the summoning order and bailable warrant issued against him.

¶8

In this conspectus, as above, I am of the considered opinion that instant second application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of the present applicant is not maintainable in light of the fact that entire criminal proceeding is already assailed before this

¶9

Court in connected Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 28273 of 2018. As such, instant application is dismissed, being misconceived and devoid of merits.

¶10

Order Date :- 18.8.2023 Pkb/

¶11

Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD KUMAR BAJPAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Munna Lal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munna Lal 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

Sufian Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sant Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanchit Alias Anshul Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Shyam Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sushil Giri and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another