Dismissed

Vijay Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC25 Apr 2023A482/6827/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant sought to club two pending trial courts involving theft charges and stay proceedings in one. The court rejected the request, holding that since recovery involved articles beyond the specific FIR and other co-accused were already convicted, clubbing was not justified.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to club two pending trial cases involving theft and to stay proceedings in one was dismissed.

Vijay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6827 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Qazi Vakil Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

1. List revised.

¶6

Heard Shri Qazi Vakil Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Vijay Kumar Singh with the prayer to allow this application and club the Sessions Trial No.335 of 2021 (State Vs. Shekhu and others) arising out of Case Crime No.249 of 2019, u/s 411, 413, 41, 102 IPC, P.S. Anwarganj, Kanpur Nagar which is pending in the court of ADJ-6, Kanpur Nagar with the Case No. 2796 of 2020 (State Vs. Shabina and others) arising out of Case Crime No.755 of 2019 u/s 457, 380, 411, 413 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Fatehpur pending in the court of C.J.M., Fatehpur to secure the ends of justice and further with the prayer to stay the further proceeding of Sessions Trial No.335 of 2021 (State Vs. Shekhu and others) arising out of Case Crime No.249 of 2019, u/s 411, 413, 41, 102 IPC, P.S. Anwarganj, Kanpur Nagar which is pending in the court of ADJ-6, Kanpur Nagar during the pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court.

¶8

The facts of the case are that a FIR was lodged on 6.11.2019 as Case Crime No.755 of 2019 u/s 457, 380 IPC,at Police Station Kotwali, District Fatehpur by Waheed Ahmad against unknown persons with the allegation that he is posted as Inspector in Police Station Malihabad, Lucknow and is a permanent resident of Mohalla Murain Tola, Police Station Kotwali, District Fatehpur. On the intervening night of 5/6.11.2019, two daughters of informant were to be married and all the persons had gone for the marriage to Om Garden, Naka. In the night some unknown persons jumped over the wall, broke the lock of the door and after breaking the almirah, stole Rs.14,00,300/- cash, two neck-less of his elder daughter of gold and some jewellery of gold of his wife etc. Three almirahs are broken. In the morning at about 4.15 a.m., they returned home and came to know of the incident. A lot of articles have been stolen. The FIR has thus been lodged. The matter was

¶9

investigated and some jewellery were recovered for which a FIR was lodged on 3.12.2019 as Case Crime No.249 of 2019 under Section 411, 413 IPC and 41 and 102 Cr.P.C., Police Station Anwarganj, District Kanpur Nagar by S.H.O Ramakant Pachauri against Shakeel and Shekhu. A charge sheet was submitted against Shabina under Section 457, 380, 411, IPC and Vijay Kumar Singh under Section 411, 413 IPC in Case Crime No.755 of 2019, Police Station Kotwali, District Fatehpur and a charge sheet was submitted against Shakeel, Shekhu, Shabina and Vijay Kumar Singh u/s 411, 413 IPC and 41, 102 Cr.P.C. The trial court took cognizance in both the matters and summoned the respective accused persons. The present petition has thus been filed with the aforesaid prayers.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an accused facing trial under Section 411, 413 IPC and 41/102 Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No.249 of 2019. It is submitted that since both the cases are up in trial and charge against the applicant has been framed on 16.3.2020 under Section 411 IPC only in Case Crime No.755 of 2019, P.S. Kotwali, District Fatehpur, the cases be clubbed together as one case is pending in Kanpur Nagar and the original case is pending in District Fatehpur and both the cases have not been clubbed together, the same pertains to theft of articles for which FIR was lodged in District Fatehpur. It is argued that recovery of the said articles is alleged to be done in Kanpur Nagar and as such the matter be clubbed and be directed to be taken up in Kanpur Nagar.

¶11

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer as made and the arguments of learned counsel for the applicant and argued that in so far as the recovery is concerned, there has been recovery of even other articles of jewellery from the accused persons. It is not only the articles which were stolen from Fatehpur for which Case Crime No.755 of 2019 has been registered which has been recovered but jewellery and cash of even other cases has been recovered and as such the clubbing of the cases will not proper. It is argued that in so far as Shekhu and Shakeel, the accused in Case Crime No.249 of 2019, u/s 41/102 Cr.P.C. and 411, 413 IPC, P.S. Anwarganj, District Kanpur Nagar are concerned, they were tried in S.T. No.416 of 2023, State Vs. Shekhu and another in which they have pleaded guilty and as such have been convicted and sentenced vide judgement and order dated 29.3.2023 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Kanpur Nagar. It is submitted that clubbing of the cases together is not in the fitness of things as the recovery of jewellery and cash is

¶12

even more than the reported theft committed in Fatehpur. It is submitted that as such the cases have to be tried independently and cannot be clubbed.

¶13

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records it is evident that FIR was lodged in District Fatehpur with regards to theft in the house of one Waheed Ahmad. A recovery was made of some cash and jewellery from Kanpur Nagar for which a FIR was lodged. The case of the prosecution is that apart from the stolen article of the case of Waheed Ahmad, there have been recovery of other articles also. Two co-accused namely Shekhu and Shakeel have pleaded guilty in the trial at Kanpur Nagar and have been convicted and sentenced vide judgement and order dated 29.3.2023 passed by competent trial court. Since the recovery is not only with regards to the case of Waheed Ahmad but even of other articles and money which is the case of the prosecution the clubbing of the case is not in the interest of justice.

¶14

The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, dismissed .

¶15

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶16

Order Date :- 25.4.2023 Gaurav

¶17

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vijay Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Raj Kapoor Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jalim Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Iqpal and 13 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nitin Aggarwal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Chandra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akshit Garg Vs State of U.P. and Another