Disposed

Channar Maurya v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC23 Oct 2024A482/33162/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging criminal proceedings alleging breach of public trust under Section 409 IPC. The High Court granted liberty to the applicant to file a discharge application and directed the trial court to decide it within four weeks, with a stay on coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file discharge application within two weeks; coercive action stayed till disposal; no objection from State to discharge application.

Channar Maurya vs State of Up and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:169157

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33162 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Channar Maurya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for opposite party no.1 State.

¶7

In view of order being passed, notices to opposite party no.2 stand dispensed with.

¶8

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging impugned summoning order dated 16.02.2005, charge-sheet dated 03.12.2004 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.1311 of 2013 (old Case No.821 of 2005) arising out of Case Crime No.78 of 2003, under Section 409 I.P.C., Police Station Balua, District Chandauli.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant superannuated from service on the post of Secretary of Cooperative Society in 2016 and prior to that departmental proceedings were initiated against him with regard to allegations which was similar to the one's levelled in the first information report lodged against applicant. It is submitted that the applicant was never provided any notice of the criminal case which was pending against him but non-bailable warrants were issued in the year 2005 and was never served upon applicant whereafter process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was issued in 2024 whereafter applicant gained knowledge of the said proceedings.

¶10

It is submitted that the allegations levelled against applicant have been indicated under Section 409 IPC but has drawn attention to the entry dated 03.12.2004 in the case diary indicating the fact that

¶11

applicant does not come within purview of a public servant and therefore even otherwise section 409 IPC would be inapplicable in the case of applicant.

¶12

It is submitted that the applicant is now 68 years of age and liberty may be granted to him for filing of discharge application before the court concerned.

¶13

With regard such submission, learned Additional Government Advocate does not have any objection in case discharge application is preferred.

¶14

In view of submissions advanced by learned counsel for applicant, liberty is granted to him to file a discharge application in the proceedings within a period of two weeks' from today which shall be considered and decided by trial court within a period of four weeks thereafter. It is directed that till the aforesaid time period, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in pursuance of impugned orders and the proceedings of Criminal Case No.1311 of 2013 (old Case No.821 of 2005) arising out of Case Crime No.78 of 2003, under Section 409 I.P.C., Police Station Balua, District Chandauli.

¶15

With the aforesaid direction, the application stands disposed of .

¶16

Order Date : - 23.10.2024 Subodh/-

¶17

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

Channar Maurya v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Channar Maurya 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

Similar cases

Kanhaiya Kaushal vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko.

Prem Prakash (Pno No. 870900774) vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Smt. Nirmala Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 4 Others

Rais Ahmad vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ramesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Arun Kumar @ Arun Bharti and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another