The High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings due to inability to determine aggressor without evidence. The Court directed the trial court to decide the applicant's bail application speedily.
Application dismissed; trial court directed to decide bail application of applicant on the same day.
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. - 7894 of 2023
Applicant :- Smt. Mamta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Dwivedi,Manish Kumar Panday
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Dwivedi, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.
Perused the record.
Challenge in this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to the charge sheet No. 21 of 2022 dated 04.02.2022 submitted in Case Crime No. 0518 of 2021, under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, P.S. Nawabganj, District Prayagraj, the Cognizance Taking Order dated 03.02.2023 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 8, Allahabad upon aforesaid charge sheet as well as the entire proceedings of consequential Case No. 247 of 2023 (State Vs. Arjun Prasad Mishra), arising out of aforementioned case crime number, now pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No. 8, Prayagraj.
At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have been occurred on 3.7.2021, an F.I.R. dated 3.7.2021 was lodged from the side of the applicant and was registered as Case Crime No. 0517 of 2023, under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, P.S. Nawabganj, District Prayagraj. In the aforesaid F.I.R. as many as 9 persons namely Neeraj Kumar Tiwari, Rajjan Babu Ojha, Sobhnath Ojha, Lalit, Vinit, Vipin, Anurag, Abhishek and Mithala have been nominated as named accused.
In respect of the same incident, another F.I.R. dated 4.7.2021 was lodged by first informant opposite party 2 and was registered as Case Crime No. 0518 of 2021, under Sections 147, 149, 452, 323, 504, 506 and 427 IPC, P.S. Nawabganj, District Praygraj. In the aforesaid F.I.R. 14 persons namely Arjun Prasad Mishra, Ankit Mishra, Amrit Mishra, Vinod Kumar Mishra, Pradeep Mishra, Prateek Mishra, Harsh Mishra, Tushar Mishra, Payal Mishra, Mamata, Pintu Shukla, Sailani Shukla, Kali Prasad Shukla alias
Bachcha have been nominated as named accused, whereas 15-20 unknown persons have also been arrayed as accused.
On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. submits that occurrence is admitted to the parties. In view of above, the question to be decided by Court below is who is the aggressor. The said question cannot be decided by this Court in present application under Section 482 Cr. P. C., as appraisal and appreciation of evidence is not admissible in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr. P. C. Moreover, the said issue cannot be dealt with in isolation of applicant, who has been charge sheeted as an accused. As such, application is liable to be dismissed.
When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same.
As a result, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.
It is, accordingly, dismissed.
Considering the fact that the applicant is a lady, Court below is directed to decide the bail application of applicant on the same day in the light of the provisions contained in proviso to Section 437 Cr. P. C.
Order Date :- 2.3.2023 HSM
Digitally signed by :- HARI SHANKER MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the charge sheet and cognizance can succeed when the issue of aggressor requires finding of fact.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Mamta
State of U.P.
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
