Criminal Revision under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed after nearly 19 years. Court held the application barred by latches due to unexplained delay and dismisses the same without evaluating merits of revision.
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. - 66
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7620 of 2023
Applicant :- Narendra Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ratnesh Kumar Shukla,Shikhar Tandon Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Shukla, the learned counsel for applicants and the learned A.G.A. for State.
Perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the Charge Sheet dated 31.12.2003 submitted in Case Crime No.330 of 2003, under Sections 147, 323, 324 IPC, Police Station-Medical College, District-Meerut, the Cognizance Taking Order/Summoning Order dated 12.03.2004 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.-4, Meerut in Case No. 3272 of 2004 (State Vs. Ravi Prakash and Another), under Sections 147, 323, 324 IPC, Police Station-Medical College, District-Meerut as well as order dated 28.05.2021 whereby non-bailable warrant has been issued against applicant 2.
At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of present application. He submits that present application has been filed after expiry of a period of more than 19 years from the date of the charge sheet i.e. 31.12.2003. As such, present application is hopelessly barred by latches. However, the latches in filing the present application have not been sufficiently explained. It is then contended that nonbailable warrant has been operating against applicant 2 since 28.05.2011. In spite of the fact that a period of more than 11 years and 6 months have rolled by, applicant 2 has not yet appeared before court below. On the above premise, he submits that no indulgence be granted by this Court in favour of applicants.
When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicants could not overcome the same.
As a result, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed on the ground of latches.
It is accordingly dismissed on the ground of latches.
Order Date :- 1.3.2023 Vinay
Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is maintainable being filed after a lapse of 19 years.
Whether the delay warrants the grant of indulgence despite the prolonged inactivity.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Narendra Kumar
Ravi Prakash
State Of U.P.
Rajeev Misra
Vinay Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
