Sanoj Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21957

Court No. - 14

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2533 of 2025

Applicant :- Sanoj Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Kumar Tiwari,Rajesh Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Rao Narendra Singh, learned AGA appearing for the State.

¶7

With the consent of the parties and as only the legal issue is involved in the present case, it is being decided at the admission stage itself.

¶8

In view of the order, which is proposed to be passed today, notice to respondent nos. 2 to 4 is hereby dispensed with.

¶9

Instant case under Section 428 Cr.P.C/528 B.N.S.S. has been filed with the following main reliefs:-

¶10

" WHEREFORE, it is most humbly and respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to invoke its inherent powers Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quash the impugned order dated 17.01.2025 passed. by the learned Sessions Judge, Sultanpur on the application moved by the respondents No.2 to 4 U/s-216 Cr. P.C in S.T. No. 208/2024 arises out of Case Crime No. 363/2023 U/s- 323, 324, 342, 504, 506, 34, 120-B, 307, 302 I.P.C. by means of which the learned Sessions Judge has alter charges U/s- 304/34 I.P.C. in place of Section-302 I.P.C. & 308/34 in place of Section 307 I.P.C, as contained in Annexure No. 1 to the petition or to pass. such other or further order, which, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Court may deem fit just and proper, with a view to prevent the abuse of process of court and otherwise to secure the ends of justice and allow this petition with cost"

¶11

The brief facts of the present case are that an FIR dated 20.11.2023 has been lodged by the applicant against the respondent nos. 2 to 4 under Sections 323, 324, 504 & 506 IPC, Police Station Motigarpur, District Sultanpur. Police after the investigation has filed the charge-sheet under Sections 323,

¶12

324, 342, 504, 506, 34, 120-B, 307 & 302 IPC.

¶13

After filing of the charge-sheet, the accused persons i.e. respondent nos. 2 to 4 had moved an application under Section 216 Cr.P.C. for alteration of Sections mentioned in charge-sheet in the following manner:-

¶14

a) Deletion of Section 302 IPC by adding Section 304 IPC.

¶15

b) Deletion of Section 307 IPC by adding Section 308 IPC.

¶16

It is further submitted that the Court concerned without considering the fact that no application is maintainable on behalf of either the complainant or the prosecution/accused persons, under Section 216 Cr.P.C., has decided the said application by giving findings on merit although power is vested only with the competent court of law to add or substract any section on its satisfaction recorded on the basis of material available on record. The section 216 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable on behalf of accused persons or any of the parties as per the law settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P. Kartikalakshmi Vs. Sri Ganesh and another reported in (2017) 3 SCC 347. Reliance has further been placed upon the another decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hasanbhai Valibhai Qureshi Vs. State of Gujarat and others reported in (2004) 5 SCC 347 .

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicant has further drawn attention of this Court to a judgment of a coordinate bench of this Court passed in the case of Nanhey Bhaiya@ Nanhan Singh and 2 others Vs. State of U.P. and another (Application Under Section 482 No. 2556 of 2023), judgment dated 31.03.2023 whereby the impugned order therein has been set aside at the admission stage while placing reliance upon the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the cases of P Kartikalakshmi (Supra) and Hasanbhai Valibhai Qureshi (supra).

¶18

On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the case but unable to dispute the law laid down by Hon'ble Court in the case of P Kartikalakshmi (Supra) and Hasanbhai Valibhai Qureshi (supra).

¶19

Having regard to aforesaid settled legal position, the impugned orders dated 17.01.2025 is unsustainable, which deserves to be quashed and the same are hereby quashed.

¶20

It is made clear that the learned trial court concerned shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order keeping in view the

¶21

provisions contained in Section 216 Cr.P.C. on its own instance and also keeping in view the observations made herein above after affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties.

¶22

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 B.N.S.S. stands allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 18.4.2025 Ashish

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sanoj Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanoj Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ayaz Khan @ Ajju @ Mohammad Ayaz Khan and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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

Rohit Kumar Sharma @ Rohit Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Km Santosh Srivastava vs Sri Deepak Kumar, Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education Deptt., Lko. and Others

Pradeep Pandey vs Mukesh Kumar Agrawal and Another

Smt. Sabra Khatoon and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another