Dismissed

Mukesh and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2024A482/11695/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed a quashable application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by accused persons. Relying on medical evidence that one of the complainants sustained grievous injuries, the Court held the case did not fall within quashing guidelines and lacked merit.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the charge sheet and stay of proceedings was dismissed.

Mukesh and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:119857

¶2

Court No. - 77

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11695 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mukesh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Syed Irfan Ali

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ajit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Syed Irfan Ali, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, Sri Triveni Saran Rai learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present Criminal Misc. Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants Mukesh, Bittu, Shailendra with the following prayers:-

¶8

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow the present 482 application by Quashing the Impugned Charge Sheet dated 30.10.2020 as well as the Cognizance Order dated 04.01.2021 and the Entire Proceeding of Case No. 16 of 2021 (State Vs Mukesh and others), registered as Case Crime No. 0108 of 2020, proceedings U/s 323, 504, 308, 325 I.P.C., P.S. Pishawa, District Aligarh, pending in the court of Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Aligarh.

¶9

It is further prayed that during the pendency of the present criminal misc. 428 application the further proceeding of the Case no. 16 of 2021 (State Vs Mukesh and others), registered as Case Crime No. 0108 of 2020, proceedings U/s 323, 504, 308, 325 I.P.C., P.S. Pishawa, District Aligarh, pending in the court of Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Aligarh may kindly be stayed.

¶10

And/or pass such other or further as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circmstances of the case, otherwise the applicants will suffer irreparable loss and injury."

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the parties have entered into compromise which has been drawn in writing on 16.6.2023, copy of the said compromise is annexure no. 4 to the affidavit in support of present 482 Cr.P.C. application. It is submitted that looking to the same, the present application be allowed and the proceedings against the applicants be quashed.

¶12

Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the same.

¶13

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing and submitted that cognizance upon the charge sheet in the matter was taken vide order dated 04.01.2021 by the court concerned. It is submitted that in the present matter Raj Rishi, Smt. Suneeta and Praful are the alleged injured persons. It is submitted that in so far as Praful is concerned he has received a lacerated wound on occipital region of skull although the doctor opined the said injury

¶14

to be simple in nature. It is further submitted that Smt. Suneeta also received a lacerated wound on the left perietal above left ear but the doctor opined the same to be simple in nature. It is submitted that in so far as Raj Rishi is concerned, he has received serious injuries on his head. He was referred to NCCT of Head wherein the doctor found linear, minimally displaced fracture involving squamous part of right temporal bone and lateral wall of right orbit. It is submitted that as such injury of Raj Rishi was serious in nature. It is submitted that the doctor has also opined the injury to be grievous in nature. It is submitted that as such the matter be dismissed.

¶15

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that in the present matter Raj Rishi, Smt. Suneeta and Praful are the alleged injured persons. Although the doctor found the injuries of Smt. Suneeta and Praful to be simple in nature but the injuries of Raj Rishi opined by the doctor to be grievous in nature.

¶16

Looking to the fact of the matter and the injuries received by the said injured Raj Rishi which are grievous in nature, as per medical opinion, the present case does not fall within the four corners of the guidelines for quashing given in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 and Yogendra Yadav and Others vs. State of Jharkhand and Another: (2014) 9 SCC 653 and as such the present application is devoid of any merit and deserves to be dismissed.

¶17

Accordingly, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

¶18

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 26.7.2024

¶20

Naresh

¶21

Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mukesh and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alok Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Poonam Devi and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Son Singh Yadav and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Rohan Yadav and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Surya Prakash Verma and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Fakharuddin and Others vs State of U.P. and Another