Dismissed

Sunil v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2024CRLA/2981/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal filed by Sunil, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dismissed the challenge against an order allowing the status of juvenile for opposite party no.2, finding lack of merit in the appellant's submitted grievances regarding date discrepancies.

What did the court decide?

The criminal appeal stands dismissed.

Sunil vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:128734

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2981 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Sunil Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Dinesh Kumar Patel Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

Although notices have already been served upon opposite party no.2, but till today none appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 either in person or through counsel.

¶8

This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (1) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 02.12.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Kushinagar at Padrauna, whereby learned court has illegally allowed the Application Paper No.3Ka under section 9 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 in Criminal Misc. Case No.468 of 2023 in S.S.T. No. 769 of 2022 (State vs. Islam and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.144 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 427, 452, 325, 308 I.P.C. and Sections 3(2)Da, 3(1)Dha of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kuber Sthan, District- Kushinagar.

¶9

While challenging the order dated 02.12.2023 through which the application under section 9 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 has been allowed by learned court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Kushinagar at Padrauna, through which opposite party no.2 has been declared as juvenile, it is the stand taken up by learned counsel for the appellant that the information with regard to certain dates which includes the date of incident, date of lodging the F.I.R. has been apprised after submission of the charge-sheet before the concerned Superintendent of Police, Kushinagar on dated 28.11.2022 through registered post, through which it has been sought certain changes of the dates in shape of 05.05.2021 to 05.09.2021, but the cognizance has been taken up on the basis of statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., which is having the date of 05.05.2021.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that once the registered letter has been sent to Superintendent of Police, Kushinagar on 28.11.2022 and the same has not been taken into consideration by way of changing the dates, order dated 02.12.2023 is not sustainable in the eye of law.

¶11

Precise query has been made by learned counsel for the appellant that whether the intimation regarding registered letter dated 28.11.2022 has ever been apprised to the concerned court in shape of preferring any affidavit, which might be available in the records while preferring instant appeal for challenging the order dated 02.12.2023. It is fairly admitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the same is not appended to this appeal at the time of challenging the order dated 02.12.2023, meaning thereby no such intimation has ever been given and the same is not permissible also once the copy of F.I.R. has already been obtained by the appellant way back in the year 2021 itself, which is bearing the date of incident as 05.05.2021, the intimation regarding change of date after preferring charge-sheet must be taken as afterthought and the same is in shape of concealing the material fact before the Investigating Officer also.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer made in the instant appeal and supported the judgement and order dated 02.12.2023.

¶13

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage it is said that there is hardly any infirmity in the order, which is under challenge through the instant appeal and as such the same is lacking merits.

¶14

Accordingly, this appeal stands dismissed .

¶15

Order Date :- 8.8.2024 Saif

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunil v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar Sahu vs State of U.P. and Another

Lovlesh Yadav @ Tubaki and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Saiyad Haidar Raza and 9 Others vs State of Up and Another

Golu Singh @ Akashay Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Sohanlal Savita vs State of U.P. and Another

Pankaj Dubey vs State of U.P. and Another