Quashed

Ram Sewak and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2023A482/38244/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court quashed a cognizance order passed by the trial court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., holding that since the charge sheet under Sections 323 and 504 IPC disclosed non-cognizable offences, it was deemed a complaint under Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., making the direct cognizance order illegal.

What did the court decide?

Cognizance order dated 10.10.2020 quashed; directions to trial court to pass fresh order under Section 2(d) Cr.P.C.

Ram Sewak and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38244 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Sewak And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Dhar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned charge sheet dated 23.5.2019 in Criminal Case No.631 of 2020 arising out of N.C.R. No.53 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Kanth, District Shahjahanpur pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (J.D.), Court No.37, Shahjahanpur. .

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the impugned charge sheet dated 23.05.2019 has been filed under section 323, 504 I.PC. He further submitted that according to explanation of Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C., a report made by a police officer in a case which discloses, after investigation, the commission of a non cognizable offence shall be deemed to be a complaint; and the police officer by whom such report is made shall be deemed to be the complainant. He further argued that in such a situation the report submitted by the police has to be treated as complaint and the Magistrate was having no power take cognizance directly on the basis of a police report and therefore the criminal proceeding initiated against the revisionists is wholly

¶8

illegal.

¶9

From the perusal of the record, it is found that the charge sheet filed is under section 323, 504 I.P.C., so in the light of Section 2-d of the code of criminal procedure, the proceedings shall be deemed to be a complaint proceedings. The police officer by whom such report is made shall be deemed to be the complaint, hence, the cognizance order dated 10.10.2020 passed by court concerned is found to be against the law, consequently the cognizance order dated 10.10.2020 is quashed with the direction to the trial court to pass a fresh order in the light of Section 2-(d) of the code of criminal procedure.

¶10

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed .

¶11

Order Date :- 10.2.2023 Krishna*

¶12

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

Ram Sewak and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sewak and 3 Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brajesh and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Dhir Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Prashant Rai and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Fahim Ahmad @ Fahim Khan and 7 Others Vs State of U.P and 2 Others

Rahul Shukla Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others