The applicant sought quashing of proceedings where his discharge application under Section 227 Cr.P.C. was rejected by the Sessions Court. The High Court dismissed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., holding that sufficient material exists on record to maintain the prosecution.
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:136437
Court No. - 77
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8859 of 2024
Applicant :- Ajeet Singh Alias Sonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kamla Singh,Vijay Shanker Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
"It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 03.02.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ghazipur in the Sessions Trial No. 771 of 2023 "State Vs. Ranjeet Singh and others" Under Section 323, 324, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. as well as order dated 22.07.2021, by which learned Magistrate has taken the cognizance on the printed proforma against applicant, against which applicant moved discharge application under Section 227 Cr.P.C, which was rejected by the learned Additional Session Judge, Ghazipur.
And further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 03.02.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ghazipur in the Session Trial No. 771 of 2023 "State Vs. Ranjeet Singh and others" Under Section 323, 324, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. as well as order dated 22.07.2021, by which learned Magistrate has taken the cognizance against the applicant, against which applicant moved discharge application under Section 227 Cr.P.C. which was
rejected by the learned Session Judge, Ghazipur, during the pendency of the present application otherwise Applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."
506, 308 I.P.C. came to be registered.
made to the judgement of Apex Court in Tarun Jit Tejpal Vs. State of Goa and Another, (2020) 17 SCC 556, wherein the Apex Court has held that if sufficient material exists on record, then the prosecution of an accused can be maintained. The court has further held that prosecution of a charge sheeted accuse can be maintained even in case of great suspicion. Since sufficient material exists on record against applicant, therefore, the prosecution of the applicant can be sustained. As such, no illegality has been committed by court below in rejecting the discharge application filed by applicant.
Order Date :- 27.8.2024 YK
Digitally signed by :- YASHWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should exercise inherent powers to quash the discharge rejection and quash the proceedings under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506, 308 IPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Tarun Jit Tejpal Vs. State of Goa and AnotherRelied on¶20
Tarun Jit Tejpal Vs. State of Goa and Another, (2020) 17 SCC 556 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Ajeet Singh Alias Sonu
State of U.P.
Another
Rajeev Misra
Yashwant Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
