In an application under section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging a charge sheet and cognizance order alleging false implication and lack of prima facie satisfaction, the High Court of Allahabad dismissed the petition, finding no good ground to entertain the objection after perusing the record.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:133819
Court No. - 77
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11913 of 2024
Applicant :- Satish Pandey @ Satishchandra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Shyam Shanker Pandey,Subodh Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ashvni Mishra,G.A.,Shubhendu Mishra
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Subodh Pandey, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Ashvni Mishra, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party-2.
Perused the record.
Applicant who is a charge sheeted accused has approached this Court by means of present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the charge sheet dated 23.8.2023, submitted in Case Crime No. 192 of 2023, under sections 504, 506, 509, 354 (d) IPC, Police Station- Jhunsi, District- Allahabad, as well as the Cognizance Taking Order/Summoning Order dated 15.9.2023, passed by Additional Chief Judicial magistrate-5, Allahabad in Case No. 1985 of 2023 (State Vs. Satish Pandey), under sections 504, 506, 509, 354 (d) IPC, Police Station- Jhunsi, DistrictAllahabad.
At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that applicant has only challenged the charge sheet dated 23.8.2023 as well as Cognizance Taking Order dated 15.9.2023, passed by Court below. No challenge has been made to the entire proceedings of aforesaid criminal case.
When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant submits that as per papers accompanying the police report, no offence as alleged is made out against applicant. Applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in aforementioned case crime number. It is then submitted that Court below has passed the Cognizance Taking Order/Summoning Order in a routine manner without recording its prima facie satisfaction. It is thus urged that impugned charge sheet as well as Cognizance Taking
Order are liable to be quashed by this Court.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed this application. He submits that charge sheet is expression of the opinion drawn by Investigating Officer on the basis of the material collected by him during course of investigation. Since the entire material collected by Investigating Officer has not been brought on record, therefore, the submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant cannot be examined. With reference to the challenge laid to summoning order, the learned A.G.A. submits that Cognizance Taking Order/Summoning Order has been passed by Court below on the basis of Police report dated 23.8.2023, submitted by Investigating Officer in terms of section 173(2) Cr.P.C. Referring to the judgement of Supreme Court in State of Gujarat Vs. Afroz Mohammed Hasanfatta, A.I.R. (2019) 20 SCC 539, the learned A.G.A. submits that since cognizance has been taken on the basis of police report, therefore, no detailed reasons are required to be mentioned in the Cognizance Taking Order/Summoning Order. Learned A.G.A. thus concludes that no good ground is made out to grant indulgence in favour of applicant.
When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same.
Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Ashvni Mishra, the learned counsel for first informant/opposite party-2 and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application under section 482 Cr.P.C. could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant, therefore, this Court does not find any good ground to entertain this application.
As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.
It is accordingly dismissed .
Order Date :- 21.8.2024 Arshad
Digitally signed by :- ARSHAD MAHMOOD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Charge Sheet and Cognizance Taking Order in the criminal complaint can be quashed under section 482 Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Gujarat Vs. Afroz Mohammed HasanfattaReferred¶13
State of Gujarat Vs. Afroz Mohammed Hasanfatta, A.I.R. (2019) 20 SCC 539 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Satish Pandey
State of U.P.
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
