Dismissed

Jogendar Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC11 Sept 2024A482/25595/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash proceedings under the Indian Forest Act and Wild Life Protection Act. The court held that fact questions and credibility determinations must be adjudicated by the trial court and did not find any material illegality, perversity, or mala fides.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the summoning order and proceedings is dismissed.

Jogendar Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:173134

¶2

Court No. - 78

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25595 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Jogendar Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Rai,Om Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned A.G.A for the State.

¶7

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 09.03.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 1943 of 2020 titled Circle Officer, Forest v. Ziledar & Others), under Section 5/26 of Indian Forest Act and Section 27, 17Ka of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, P.S. Haliya, District Mirzapur, pending trial in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants states that applicants have been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motives. He submits that applicants were not present at the time of the incident. The applicant's place of residence is 20 k.m., away from the place of the incident. Therefore, they are not involved in the alleged offence. The applicants have been arrayed as accused on the basis of the statement of co-accused, except that no other evidence came forth during the investigation. He further states that applicants are owners of 78 bighas of land. Therefore, they are not expected to graze the animals in the forest.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has drawn attention of the Court to the complaint filed by the Forest Circle Officer, wherein the loss

¶10

has been quantified which is stated to be Rs. 8,39,300/-. He next submits that the contents of F.I.R., prima facie , fulfilled the ingredients of Section 5/26 of Indian Forest Act and Section 27, 17Ka of Wild Life Protection Act. He submits that the contention raised by counsel for the applicants is merely a defence that cannot be looked into at this stage.

¶11

In the instant matter, the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the material on record it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceeding are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. Similarly no such illegality, perversity or any other substantial error could be pointed out in the impugned summoning order, so as to warrant any interference by this court in exercise of powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C. Further, on examination of the FIR and the statement recorded by the police under Section 161 Cr.P.C., prima facie , the ingredients of Section 5/26 of Indian Forest Act and Section 27, 17Ka of Wild Life Protection Act, are made out.

¶12

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed.

¶13

Order Date :- 5.11.2024

¶14

Shafique

¶15

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SAFIKUR RAHAMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jogendar Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jogendar Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Sahukar and 2 Others vs State of U.P.and Another

Jairam Nishad vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandan Rai vs State of U.P. and Another

Niraj @ Banti Shahi and 3 Others vs State of Upand Another

Preeti vs State of U.P. and Another

Mukesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others