Dismissed

Mohd Azam v. State of Up 2 Others

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2024A482/7843/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant sought quashing of proceedings arising from three FIRs alleging separate disputes on the same day. The Court held the charges were distinct, noting that a stay on one FIR did not affect earlier investigations. The application was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The application to quash the impugned cognizance, summoning order, and charge sheet was dismissed.

Mohd Azam vs State of Up 2 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:109457

¶2

Court No. - 77

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7843 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd Azam Opposite Party :- State Of Up 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Utkarsh Malviya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

1. List revised.

¶7

Heard Shri Utkarsh Malviya, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶8

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant-Mohd. Azam with the following prayers:-

¶9

"i. the Entire Proceedings arising out of Criminal Misc. Case No. 1894/2020 titled as State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Azam Sabhasad and Others pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-II, District Allahabad;

¶10

ii. the Cognizance and Summoning Order dated 20.08.2020 passed by Learned ACJM, Court No. 7, Allahabad, in the abovestated Criminal Misc. Case No. 1894/2020.

¶11

iii. the Charge Sheet no. 156/2020 dated 09.08.2020 filed under section 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 336, 427, 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code in relation to Case Crime No. 170 of 2020 registered at PS: Khuldabad, District: Allahabad (Prayagraj) and the concerned first information report thereof.

¶12

AND

¶13

It is further prayed that during the pendency of the present application, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the entire proceedings in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1894 of 2020 titled as State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Azam Sabhasad and Others pending before the court of Learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Allahabad, failing which the Applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury for which no fault on his part."

¶14

The FIR of the present matter was lodged on 24.6.2020 at 03:15 hours by Mukhtar Ahmad against the applicant and 12 other named persons along with 2-3 unknown persons with the allegation that on 23.6.2020 a theft took place in the afternoon in his shop and after gathering information about it, he came to know that the stolen articles have been given by Bhaiya Kabadi to Asif. For inquiry when he went to their house, the accused persons

¶15

collected there and assaulted him, his son Waseem Ahmad, cousin brother Fahjan, uncle Ishraq, cousin brother Shahbaz, nephew Firoz, wife Smt. Sarbari Begum and cousin brother Chuttan with stones, bricks and lathi-danda on which he and other persons by saving themselves entered inside the house and the accused persons by pelting stones entered in the house and broke the articles of the house with bricks and danda and two vehicles being Scorpio and Ertiga were also damaged. Azam and Asif assaulted his son Waseem with danda on his head due to which he received injuries and many other people received serious injuries. The accused persons used to threaten them often. They assaulted the ladies and tore their clothes also. A report be lodged and the matter be investigated.

¶16

The matter was investigated and a charge sheet against the applicant and 12 other persons was filed under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 336, 427, 504 and 506 IPC. In so far as Asif, 2-3 unknown persons and Shahbaj @ Manja @ Shadab were concerned, they were not charge sheeted and their names were mentioned in column 12 of the charge sheet as persons not charge sheeted. The court concerned vide its order dated 20.08.2020 took cognizance upon the said charge sheet and summoned the accused persons.

¶17

A FIR was further lodged on 24.6.2020 at 04:25 hours by Mohd. Asif against 14 accused persons which was registered as Case Crime No.171 of 2020, Police Station Khuldabad, District Prayagraj under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 336, 352, 427 and 504 IPC with the allegation that on 23.6.2020 at about 9.45 p.m. some dispute arose between Bhaiya Kabadi and Hanuman of the locality on which he intervened and got it settled but 13 named accused persons being annoyed by it with an intention to murder on 23.6.2020 at about 10 p.m. collected together being armed with lathi-danda, iron rod, bricks and stones entered his house and assaulted him due to which he received injuries and fell down. Saleemuddin, Shaban and Golu tried to save him. Injury was received on the head and in an unconscious stage, he was brought to the house. A report be lodged and action be taken.

¶18

The matter was investigated and a charge sheet against 12 accused persons was filed under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 336, 352, 427 and 504 IPC. Three accused persons were arrayed in column 12 amongst the non-charge sheeted accused. The court concerned vide its order dated 20.08.2020 took cognizance upon the said charge sheet and summoned the accused persons.

¶19

Another FIR was also lodged on 24.06.2020 at 05:37 hours which was registered as Case Crime No.172 of 2020, Police Station Khuldabad, District Prayagraj under Sections 147, 148, 149, 188, 323, 352, 504, 506 IPC and 7 Crl. Law Amendment Act by Krish Murari Chaurasia against the applicant and 26 named persons along with 20-25 unknown persons with the allegation that while he was on his duty in the area, one person came there and told him that a dispute is going on near the house of Azam Sabhasad and told him to reach there immediately otherwise some big incident may happen on which he passed an information to other police personnels, took them and reached there and found that by violating the guidelines of social distancing in Pandemic Corona, the accused persons named in the FIR and the unknown persons were assaulting with lathi-danda and sharp-edged weapons and were also physically assaulting each other and there was commotion in the area. Both the parties suffered injuries and there were bleeding injuries also. The windows and doors of houses were broken and were spread on the road. The people of the place had closed their doors and windows due to fear. The parties were indulged in abusing each other and threatening each other. PRV and other police personnels reached there and informed the people about the modalities of Covid Pandemic. The FIR was thus lodged.

¶20

The investigation in the matter concluded on which charge sheet was submitted against 26 persons including the applicant and Sadaan was the person not charge sheeted. The court concerned vide its order dated 26.08.2020 took cognizance upon the said charge sheet and summoned the accused persons therein.

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the proceedings of the present case deserves to be quashed inasmuch as the present case relates to the same incident for which two other FIR's being FIR of Case Crime No.171 of 2020 and 172 of 2020 have been lodged. It is submitted that since two other FIR's have been lodged with relation to the same incident for a fight had taken place in the evening of 23.6.2020, lodging of the present FIR was totally illegal. It is submitted that since the incident in all the three matters is the same, the three FIR's are for the same offences, hence they are illegal. It is submitted that the proceedings emanating from Case Crime No.172 of 2020 were challenged before this Court in Application U/S 482 No.6669 of 2023 (Mohd. Azam Vs. State of U.P. and another) by the applicant in which a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 2.3.2023 has stayed the coercive action against the applicant in the said case, copy of the said order has been produced by learned counsel for the applicant which is taken

¶22

on record. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of T.T. Antony Vs. State of Kerala and others, (2001)6 SCC 181 and Arnab Ranjan Goswami Vs. Union of India and others, (2020) 14 SCC 12 to buttress his arguments. It is submitted that the prayer made in the present petition be allowed and the proceedings impugned be quashed.

¶23

Per contra, learned counsel for the state vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing.

¶24

After having heard learned counsel for both the parties and perusing the records, at the very first place the argument of learned counsel for the applicant appeared to be impressive but on further going through the records, the same appears to be totally misconceived and fallacious. The proceedings impugned are of the first case of which the FIR was lodged as Case Crime No.170 of 2020 at Police Station Khuldabad, district Prayagraj by Mukhtar Ahmad and the allegations in the three FIR's are totally different and in no manner have similarity with each other, more so the challenge of the proceedings emanating from Case Crime No.172 of 2020, Police Station Khuldabad, District Prayagraj was although done before this Court and an interim order has been passed in the matter but in para 10 of the said order, the coordinate Bench of this Court has made it clear that grant of stay would not affect either the investigation or enquiry or trial arising from the FIR registered earlier. Since the present matter relates to the first report lodged, the benefit of argument or fact that the other two reports qualify on the test of sameness of allegations is not available to learned counsel for the applicant. The present petition thus has no substance.

¶25

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, dismissed .

¶26

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶27

Order Date :- 5.7.2024 Gaurav Kuls

¶28

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohd Azam v. State of Up 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Azam v. State of Up 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Shankar and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Ravi Sahai vs State of U.P. and Another

Rijwan Ahmad and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Shweta Shashikant vs Directorte of Enforcement

Taj Babu and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Chirag Khurana vs State of U.P. and Another