Prakash Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and 2 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39062

Court No. - 15

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1701 of 2025

Applicant :- Prakash Gupta And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Hemant Kumar Mishra,Abhishek Mishra,Arti Ganguly

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Udai Bhan Pandey

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Hemant Kumar Mishra, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashok Srivastava, the learned A.G.A. and Shri Udai Bhan Pandey, the learned counsel for the opposite party No.3.

¶8

This Court has issued notices to the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 by means of an order dated 24.03.2025. The office has reported that on 02.05.2025, notices have been served in person upon the opposite party Nos.2 and 3. The opposite party No.3 has put in appearance by filing vakalatnama in favour of his counsel and a counter affidavit has been filed by the opposite party No.3. On 05.05.2025, an interim order has been passed providing that no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants till the next date of listing.

¶9

The opposite party No.2 has not put in appearance before the Court in spite of service of notice.

¶10

As the opposite party No.2 has not elected to appear before this court to oppose the application, the opposite party No.3 has already filed a counter affidavit and the learned AGA has stated that the State does not propose to file a counter affidavit, the application is being disposed of finally.

¶11

By means of the present application under Section 482

¶12

Cr.P.C. the applicants have sought quashing of the impugned charge sheet dated 24.07.2022, the cognizance order dated 17.01.2024 passed by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, District- Unnao in Crl. Case No.496 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No.74 of 2022, under Sections 430 I.P.C. at Police Station Auras, District Unnao as well as the entire criminal proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶13

The aforesaid case has been instituted on the basis of an FIR lodged on 21.05.2022 against five persons, including the applicants, stating that the informant had obtained a fisheries lease of a pond for a period of ten years. While he was away to attend a weeding on 16.05.2022, the accused persons put poison in the pond and killed the fishes.

¶14

During investigation, the informant reiterated the FIR version before the Investigating Officer. When the Investigating Officer asked about the detailed particulars about the incident, initially the informant did not give any particulars and he stated that he was unable to produce any witnesses of the incident and he stated that he would do so later on.

¶15

Subsequently, the Investigating Officer recorded statements of some persons- Uma Shankar, and Gauri Shankar, who stated that they had seen the accused persons feeding something to the fishes in the pond. Other persons- Ashok Kumar and Ram Kishun had stated that they had seen several persons gathered around the pond and some dead fishes floating in the pond. The persons present there stated that the accused persons had fed something to the fishes due to which the fishes had died. The Investigating Officer thereafter submitted a charge-sheet dated 24.07.2022 for offence under Section 430 IPC against all the accused persons. The trial Court took cognizance of the offence on 17.01.2024 and summoned the accused persons to face trial

¶16

for the offence.

¶17

The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the Investigating Officer claims to have issued notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. to the accused persons, copies whereof are annexed as Annexure No.4 and 5 to the application. These notices do not mention any date time and place for appearance of the accused persons and the same do not contain the name and signatures of the person issuing the notices and the date of issuance of the notices.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicants next submitted that a dispute regarding grant of fishery rights in respect of the pond is pending in this Court in Writ Petition No.6773 (MB) of 2023. On 31.03.2023, the S.D.M. had passed an order restraining both the parties for catching fishes in the pond during pendency of the writ petition. He stated that the writ petition is still pending.

¶19

The learned counsel for the opposite party No.3 has stated that the fishery rights in respect of the pond has been allotted to the opposite party No.3.

¶20

The Investigating Officer has submitted a charge-sheet without adverting to the aforesaid aspects of the matter in absence of any evidence which may prima facie establish that any poison had in fact been added to the pond and it has resulted in death of the fishes.

¶21

The learned trial Court has taken cognizance of the offence without scrutinizing the aforesaid aspects of the matter which are evident from the evidence collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation.

¶22

In view of the aforesaid, the charge-sheet having been submitted without any evidence to establish the commission of any offence by the applicants, is unsustainable in law and is liable to be quashed. The order dated passed by the trial Court

¶23

taking cognizance of the offence without scrutinizing the prosecution evidence appears to have been passed in a mechanical manner and it is also unsustainable in law.

¶24

Accordingly, the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed and the impugned charge sheet dated 24.07.2022, the cognizance order dated 17.01.2024 passed by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, DistrictUnnao as well as the entire criminal proceedings in Crl. Case No.496 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No.74 of 2022, under Sections 430 I.P.C. at Police Station Auras, District Unnao are hereby quashed .

¶25

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶26

Order Date :- 9.7.2025

¶27

-Amit K-

¶28

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Prakash Gupta and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash Gupta and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sandeep Kumar Gupta @ Sandeep Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Triveni Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko and 2 Others

Kishan Lal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Gopal Vyas vs Union of India Thru. C.B.N.

Pramila and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Rakesh Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another