Dismissed

Girjesh Kumar Gaur and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 May 2023CRLA/3306/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed a Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the SC/ST Act seeking to quash proceedings and chargesheet. The court held there was no illegality in the summoning order, noting grievous injuries sustained by the victim could not be self-inflicted.

What did the court decide?

Immediate restriction of the appeal. No stay on the trial proceedings.

Girjesh Kumar Gaur and 2 Others Vs State of U.P… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:101330

¶2

Court No. - 81

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3306 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Girjesh Kumar Gaur And 2 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Faizan Siddiqui Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Amit Kumar Yadav,Karunesh Pratap Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Faizan Siddiqui, learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. for State as well as Sri Karunesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2 perused the record.

¶7

The instant Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been moved by the appellants- Girjesh Kumar Gaur, Suneel Kumar Gaur and Naseem with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings as well as impugned charge-sheet dated 02.06.2021 and impugned cognizance order dated 04.08.2021 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Basti in Case No. UPB5010024772021 of 2021 (State Vs. Girjesh Kumar Gaur and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 94 of 2021, under Sections 323, 325, 504, 308 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5 of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Munderwa, District Basti, pending in the Court of Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Basti.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellants have raised many factual submissions in order to show that the incident as shown in the F.I.R. and in the statement of the prosecution witnesses including of injured persons is highly improbable and could not be believed. It is also submitted that the parties are highly inimical towards each other and prior to the lodging of the instant First Information Report, an application was moved by appellant-1 before the S.S.P. concerned and a non-cognizable report was registered pertaining to this application and after investigation of the same under Section 155(2) Cr.P.C., charge sheet has also been filed. Thus, the submissions of charge sheet as well as the passing of the impugned summoning order of this case is bad, as the same is counter-blast and is liable to be set aside.

¶9

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 however, submits that the offence under Section 308 I.P.C. is based on the injury allegedly sustained by the injured persons and the nature of the injuries are such which could not be self sustained or manufactured. Moreover, the charge sheet has been filed after thorough investigation and there is no illegality either in the submission of the charge sheet or in passing of the summoning order by the Special Court.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has also supported the impugned order.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for parties and having perused the record. It is evident that the injury report pertaining to the injured Amit Rai Kannaujiya and supplementary injury report would evidently demonstrate that grievous injury has been sustained by the injured and fracture of bone of clevical area has also been found. Evidently, this injury could not be self inflicted or manufactured. Apart from this injury other injuries have also been sustained by the injured person.

¶12

Thus having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any illegality in the summoning order and any merit in this appeal and in result the appeal appears to be devoid of merits and is dismissed as such.

¶13

However, mere dismissal of this appeal shall not preclude the appellants to take all such grounds which have been taken in this appeal, at the stage of framing charges/discharge before the trial Court and if such grounds are taken at an appropriate stage, it would be obligatory on the part of the Special Judge to deal all such grounds at the time of framing of charge/discharge.

¶14

Order Date :- 10.5.2023 Imtiyaz

¶15

Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Girjesh Kumar Gaur and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girjesh Kumar Gaur and 2 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

Iliyas @ Mulla and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suman Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Avnish Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Kamlesh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Manjeet and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nabi Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another