Applicants sought quashing of criminal case proceedings and chargesheet under Section 482 CrPC arising from a cross-FIR situation involving two FIRs lodged by opposing sides over related occurrences. The State argued the aggressor question requires presence of applicants. The application was dismissed.
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:166492
Court No. - 72
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32991 of 2024
Applicant :- Shiv Kumar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mayank Maurya,Mool Chandra Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Mool Chandra Maurya, the learned counsel for applicants and the learned A.G.A. for State.
Perused the record.
Applicants Shiv Kumar and 2 others, who are charge sheeted accused, have approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. with the following prayer:-
"It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow the the present application and to quash the entire proceedings of the Criminal Case and chargesheet dated 23.01.2023 as well as summoning order dated 23.11.2023 in Criminal Case No. 26104 of 2023 (State Vs. Shiv Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 144 of 2022 under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 of IPC, Police StationMirhachi, District pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah.
It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the further proceedings Criminal Case No. 26104 of 2023 (State Vs. Shiv Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 144 of 2022 under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 of IPC, Police StationMirhachi, District pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah during the pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court and/or pass such order and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the present case, otherwise the applicants shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."
Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 4.3.2022, a delayed F.I.R. dated 5.3.2023 was lodged by first informant Vivek Garg (applicant) and was registered as Case Crime No. 0038 of 2022 under Section 147, 323,504, 506, 452 IPC, P.S. Mirhachi, District Etah, In the aforesaid F.I.R. Rohtash Yadav, Harvir Yadav, Sarvendra, Harkesh Yadav have been nominated as named accused, whereas some
other persons have also been arraigned accused.
With regard to the same nonoccurence dated 7.3.2023, a delayed F.I.R. dated 10.8.2022 was lodged by Gagan Kumar first informant/opposite party 2 and was registered as Case Crime No. 0144 of 2022, under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC P.S Mirhachi, District Etah. In the aforesaid F.I.R., 8 persons namely Gagan Kumar, Dr. Rahul, Dr. V.P. Singh, Jagdeepak, Devraj Dilshad Ali, S.I.Devendra Singh and S.I. Rajendra Singh have been nominated as accused. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. submits that occurrence is admitted to the parties as cross F.I.Rs. Cross F.I.R. having been lodged from both the sides. In view of above, the primary question which is to be decided by Court below is as to who is the aggressor. The said question cannot be decided isolation i.e. in the absence of applicants. As such, no indulgence be granted by this Court in favour of applicants.
Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the objection raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application are clearly borne out from the record and further the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant1. As such, no interference is warranted in present application.
When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicants could not overcome the same.
As a result present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.
It is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 17.10.2024 HSM
Digitally signed by :- HARI SHANKER MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether proceedings of the criminal case arising from a cross-FIR should be quashed where both sides lodged FIRs over the same occurrence.
Whether the question of who was the aggressor can be decided without all parties present.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shiv Kumar and 2 Others
Gagan Kumar
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
