Dismissed

Neraj and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Mar 2023A482/8767/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash summoning orders and stay proceedings in a criminal case. The court held that the trial court applied its mind and there was no illegality or arbitrariness in the impugned orders. It relied on settled law that a summoning order cannot be quashed by the same court.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed with no quashing of impugned orders.

Neraj and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8767 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Neraj And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Shri Ramesh Chandra Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri S.B. Maurya, learned counsel for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants is permitted to correct the date of the impugned order in the prayer of this petition.

¶8

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants-Neraj and Chotu @ Ramakant with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.6695 of 2019, State Vs. Chhotu @ Ramakant and another u/s 323, 506, 308 IPC, P.S. Shahganj, District Agra on the charge sheet in case crime no.275 of 2018 against the order dated 18.6.2019 and 15.2.2023 passed by Spl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra and further to stay the aofresaid orders passed in the aforesaid case.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the trial court has illegally rejected the application dated 15.2.2023 filed by the applicants for quashing the summoning order dated 18.6.2019 inasmuch as no offence under Section 308 IPC is made out and the charge sheet has been submitted in a totally illegal manner. The trial court did not apply its mind at all and in an arbitrary manner passed the impugned order dated 15.2.2023 and rejected the said application of the applicants. It is argued that record would go to show that no offence under Section 308 IPC is made out and trial court should have allowed the said application and quashed the order summoning the applicants and then court should have summoned the applicants under appropriate Sections.

¶10

Per contra, learned counsel for the state opposed the prayer for quashing.

¶11

After having heard learned counsel for both the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicants have been

¶12

summoned vide order dated 18.6.2019 for offences under Sections 323, 308, 504, 506 IPC. The applicants moved the application dated 15.2.2023 before the trial court with the prayer that the said summoning order be quashed as offence under Section 308 IPC is not made out. The said Section was added during investigation as the NCR was lodged under Section 323, 504, 406 IPC. The trial court rejected the said application vide order dated 15.2.2023 on the ground that there are no reasonable ground for entertaining the said application and as such rejected the same. The said order does not suffer from any irregularity or illegality. Summoning order once passed, cannot be quashed by the said court itself. The said position is well settled in law. There is no illegality in the impugned order dated 15.2.2023. In so far as the other order dated 18.6.2019 is concerned, the trial court has applied its mind and summoned the applicants. There is even no irregularity or illegality in the said order.

¶13

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶14

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 16.3.2023 Gaurav

¶16

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

Neraj and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neraj and Another 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

Ram Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Abdul Samad Vs State of U.P and Another

Keshav Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Jain and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhishek Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rais Ahamad Vs State of U.P. and Another