Jugul Kishore Sharma vs State of Up and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31521

Court No. - 76

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23617 of 2024

Applicant :- Jugul Kishore Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kant Dubey,Lavkush Dixit,Santosh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused material on record.

¶7

The instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the cognizance order dated 02.04.2024, charge sheet dated 01.03.2024, as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 5599 of 2024, titled State v. Jugal Kishore, arising out of Case Crime No.0213 of 2023, under Section 307 IPC and Section 25/27/30 Arms Act, P.S. Kapurpur, District Hapur, pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)-I/Judicial Magistrate, Hapur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the injured has filed an affidavit stating that neither the applicant fired upon him nor did he witnessed who actually fired at him. This affidavit was submitted to the Investigating Officer during the course of the investigation; however, the Investigating Officer has failed to acknowledge or take note of it. As such, the proceedings initiated against the applicant are rendered vitiated under the law. It is further submitted that the applicant and the injured are real brothers. The father of the injured, in his affidavit, has stated that while he was on his way to his field, an unknown person fired at

¶9

his son (the injured), and he could not identify that person. He immediately took the injured to Devnandani Hospital, for treatment. Learned counsel further submits that the father of the injured has made several complaints to the S.P. and through the Chief Minister's portal, detailing the reasons for the false implication of the applicant. These complaints allege that the Investigating Officer, with vested interests, has filed a charge sheet against the applicant instead of submitting a final report.

¶10

Per contra , the learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that it is established that the injured sustained injuries. A pistol, which was used in the commission of the crime, was also recovered by the Investigating Officer at the place of incident and sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for ballistic examination. Learned A.G.A. further drawn the attention of the Court to the contents of the FIR and the subsequent investigation, wherein clear allegations of firing have been levelled against the applicant which attracts Section 307 IPC and Section 25/27/30 Arms Act. Therefore, no case for quashing the aforesaid proceedings is made out.

¶11

Based on the foregoing deliberations, this Court, prima facie , observes that on 16.12.2023 at about 8:30 a.m., a scuffle took place between the applicant and his real brother regarding the payment of electricity bill. Aggrieved by the same, the applicant allegedly fired at his brother and he received serious injuries on his person. The injured was then taken to Devnandi Hospital for treatment by his father. On perusal of injury report, it is found that the injured has sustained gunshot wound measuring 1 cm x 1 cm in depth on the left side of the abdomen, 6 cm away from the umbilicus, slightly upward, with an exit wound measuring 1 cm x

¶12

1 cm on the right side of the abdomen, 16 cm downward from the umbilicus, slightly above the interior. Bleeding was present.

¶13

The credibility of the affidavit, filed by the injured and his father, cannot be assessed at this stage, especially considering the seriousness of the offense committed by the applicant as he shot fire at his own brother. The veracity of the affidavit and the statements of the witnesses can be properly tested during the trial. Therefore, no grounds for quashing the entire proceedings is made out.

¶14

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit, and it is accordingly dismissed .

¶15

Order Date :- 4.3.2025 A. Tripathi

¶16

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶17

Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jugul Kishore Sharma v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jugul Kishore Sharma v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd Abbas Khan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anwar Shahjad vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Rahina Khatun and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Priti and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rohit Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Baghel vs State of U.P. and Another