Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a charge-sheet and cognizance order for an alleged fatal tractor accident was dismissed; the court held the allegations raised only disputed factual questions and a prima facie case existed.
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:150184
Court No. - 92
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 31041 of 2024
Applicant :- Yaduvendra Singh Alias Dolu Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raghuraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
It is further submitted that the Court below has rightly taken cognizance against the applicant and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings.
"(i) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
(ii) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.
(iii) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.
(iv) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.
(v) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(vi) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(vii) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides
and/or where the proceeding is 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."
Order Date :- 13.9.2024
pks
Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the charge-sheet and cognizance order in the fatal road-accident case disclose no offence and should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan LalRelied on¶6
1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 · Who else cites this
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of MaharashtraReferred¶7
AIR 2021 SC 1918 · Who else cites this
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶7
A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.SharmaReferred¶7
1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and anotherReferred¶7
2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Yaduvendra Singh Alias Dolu Singh
State of U.P.
Naresh Babu
Prashant Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
