Dismissed

Ajay Sonkar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Sept 2024A482/31135/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single bench dismissed the application under S. 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the charge-sheet. The court observed that both parties alleged each other as aggressors in a composite incident where both sides filed FIRs, and since no denial of presence was established, no interference was warranted.

What did the court decide?

Application under S. 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of charge-sheet and summoning order was dismissed.

Ajay Sonkar and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:154580

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

(Sl No.1)

Court No. - 79

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 31135 of 2024

¶7

Applicant :- Ajay Sonkar And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Salma Bano Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶8

Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

¶9

1. Heard Sri Salma Bano, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶10

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the charge-sheet dated 06.10.2019 as well as order dated 13.11.2019 in Case Crime No. 102 of 2019 (State of U.P. vs. Ajay Sonkar) u/S 323, 308, 325, 504, 147 I.P.C., P.S.- Khanpur, District- Ghazipur, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghazipur.

¶11

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in the incident dated 11.08.2019, both sides have sustained injuries and both sides have filed the F.I.R. against each other and in the said case the charge-sheet has been filed without proper investigation of the case. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicants seeks quashing of the summoning order dated 13.11.2019 as well as the charge-sheet against the applicant herein.

¶12

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A for State submits that admittedly the applicants did not deny the presence at the place of incident on the date of incident, as they have also filed a cross F.I.R., which was lodged subsequently after 10 days of the registration of the instant F.I.R. Therefore, learned A.G.A. submits that who were the actual aggressors is a subject matter of trial, therefore, no interference is called for in the instant case.

¶13

5. Having heard the rival submissions made by learned counsels for the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the record of the case. From the record of the case, it is apparent that on

¶14

10.09.2019, an F.I.R. was registered by the opposite party no.2 against the applicants herein, alleging that on 11.08.2019, at about 9:00 P.M., the son of the opposite party no.2 was going back to his home after closing his shop. When he reached Uchaori Tiraha, the applicants herein have assaulted his son as well as one Ram Singh with lattis . After getting intimation about the same when the opposite party no.2 and his wife reached there, they were also assaulted by the applicants herein. Therefore, there being the injured witnesses, who have duly supported the case as lodged in the F.I.R., thereupon a chargesheet dated 06.10.2019 was filed against the applicants herein. Subsequently to the registration of the instant F.I.R., it appears that the father of the applicant no.1 has also lodged the similar F.I.R. with regard to the same incident on 19.09.2019. It is also stated that in that case also, the charge-sheet has been filed.

¶15

6. Since, with regard to the same incident there are two versions available before the court concerned and both the parties are alleging the other side being the aggressor of the incident and the applicants have not denied their presence at the place of incident, therefore, this Court does not find any good reason to entertain the instant application and the same is accordingly dismissed .

¶16

Order Date :- 23.9.2024 Shubham Arya

¶17

(Anish Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM ARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ajay Sonkar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Sonkar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. 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

Similar cases

Ankit Singh Gusain and 4 Others vs State of Up and Another

Smt Pinki Rani vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Prince Chaprana and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Sudhir Kumar Singh vs Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal Gonda and 4 Others

Rajpal Singh and Others vs Additional Commissioner, Consolidation, Lucknow and Others

Mohd Tauqeer Ahmad and Another vs State of U.P. and Another