Disposed

Jagdish Yadav v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2024A482/16520/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A charge-sheeted accused sought quashing of proceedings under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC. The court declined to entertain the Section 482 petition, holding the innocence submissions could be examined by the magistrate on a discharge application under Section 239 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with direction to file discharge application under S.239 Cr.P.C. within two weeks; court below not to proceed until it is decided.

Jagdish Yadav vs State of Up and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:137053

¶2

Court No. - 77

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16520 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Jagdish Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arpana Ray,Riyajuddin Ansari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶6

Heard Mrs. Shams Khatoon Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Riyajuddin Ansari, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1

¶7

Perused the record.

¶8

Charge sheeted accused Jagdish Yadav has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:

¶9

" It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the entire proceedings of the criminal case no. 5526 of 2020 (State of U.P. Vs. Ramnagina Yadav and others) under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., arising out of N.C.R. No. 21 of 2020 under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station-Tarkulwa, District-Deoria and pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.19, District Deoria, and also quash the cognizance order dated 18.11.2020; and may also be pleased to quash the further proceeding of the charge sheet dated 17.08.2020 under sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. filed in N.C.R. No. 21 of 2020 under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Tarkulwa, District-Deoria.

¶10

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the entire proceedings of the criminal case no. 5526 of 2020 (State of U.P. Vs. Ramnagina Yadav and others) under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., arising out of N.C.R. No. 21 of 2020 under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C.

¶11

Police Station-Tarkulwa, District-Deoria and pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.19, District Deoria, and also stay the effect and operation of the cognizance order dated 18.11.2020; and may also be pleased to stay the further proceeding of the charge sheet dated 17.08.2020 under sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. filed in N.C.R. No. 21 of 2020 under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Tarkulwa, DistrictDeoria during the pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court.

¶12

And/or to pass such and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, otherwise, the Applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in any terms."

¶13

Learned counsel for applicant has raised various submissions to point out the innocence of applicant. On the above premise, she submits that order impugned and consequential proceedings cannot be sustained and therefore, liable to be quashed by this Court.

¶14

Per Contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed this application. He submits that applicant has remedy under Section 239 Cr.P.C. by moving a discharge application before court below. However, the applicant has rushed to this Court without seeking aforesaid remedy before court below. In view of above, this application is liable to be dismissed with liberty to applicant to move a discharge application before court below seeking discharge in the pending criminal case.

¶15

When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same.

¶16

Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned

¶17

A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record this court finds that no useful purpose shall be served in keeping this application pending, as the submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant regarding innocence of applicant can very well be examined by court below thread bare at the time of deciding the discharge application as court below has the advantage of having the entire record.

¶18

Accordingly this application is disposed of finally with a direction to applicant to approach court below by filing a discharge application in terms of Section 239 Cr.P.C. seeking his discharge in above mentioned criminal case. In case, such a discharge application is filed by applicant within a period of two weeks from today alongwith a certified copy of this order, the court below shall decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months thereafter.

¶19

It goes without saying that till the disposal of discharge application as directed above, court below shall not proceed further with the matter.

¶20

Order Date :- 27.8.2024 YK

¶21

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

Jagdish Yadav v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish Yadav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Keshaw Singh vs State of Up and Another

Vijendra Vasudeo vs State of U.P. and Another

Kaushal Kumar Ojha vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Faizan Saifi vs State of U.P. and Another

X Juvenile vs State of Up and another

Ranjeet and Another vs State of U.P. and Another