Hari Narayan Alias Har Narayan and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19422

Court No. - 76

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3389 of 2025

Applicant :- Hari Narayan Alias Har Narayan And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Goswami Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the record.

¶7

The present application, filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., seeks quashing of the charge sheet dated 13.05.2024, the cognizance and summoning order dated 22.05.2024, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Agra, in Case No. 12855 of 2024, titled State v. Phool Singh & Others , arising out of Case Crime No. 9 of 2024. The case is registered under Sections 147, 148, 332, 353, 504, 506 of IPC, Sections 9, 27, 29, 50, 51 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and Section 26 of the Indian Wildlife Protection Act, 1927, at Police Station Sikandra, District Agra.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants contends that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that applicant no. 1, Hari Narayan, had solemnized his marriage with the sister of Pravesh in the village Dall Ka Pura on 28.11.2023, and on 24.02.2024, Hari Narayan visited his in-laws' house along with his nephew, Devendra, for the bidai ceremony of his wife. At the request of his brother-in-law, they proceeded to visit the Chambal river, where they were allegedly apprehended by the forest officers, along with Devendra and his brother-in-law. It

¶9

is further argued that applicant no. 2, Devendra, was not named in the FIR but his name surfaced later in the charge sheet as a relative of applicant no. 1. The learned trial court has taken cognizance on the charge-sheet without application of judicial mind, and thereafter, erroneously summoned the applicants, which is vitiated under law.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. submits that the FIR was lodged by a forest officer, who is also a wildlife conservation officer (Jeev Rakshak). According to the prosecution, on 24.07.2024, the applicants, along with other co-accused, were found illegally fishing in the Chambal river. Upon being confronted by the complainant, the applicants and their accomplices allegedly assaulted the complainant with sticks and an axe, causing severe injuries. One of the victims, Rahul Jadaun, sustained grievous head injuries and had to be hospitalized. It is submitted that the name of applicant no. 1 is specifically mentioned in the FIR, while the name of applicant no. 2 surfaced during the investigation.

¶11

After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, including the statements of the injured recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the nature of the injuries sustained by the injured, and the fact that the injured person is a government employee, this Court finds that a prima facie case is made out against the applicants.

¶12

The contentions raised by the applicants' counsel pertain to factual disputes that require proper adjudication by the trial court. It is well settled that proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are not meant for determining the sufficiency or insufficiency of evidence collected by the prosecution. Such matters fall exclusively within the domain of the trial court.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court finds no justifiable ground for interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the application is devoid of merit, and is dismissed.

¶14

Order Date :- 5.2.2025 Anil K. Sharma

¶15

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hari Narayan Alias Har Narayan and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hari Narayan Alias Har Narayan and Another v. State of U.P. 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

Similar cases

Sarita Mishra vs State of U.P. and Another

Indrapal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Muslim vs State of U.P. and Another

Manish Yadav vs State of U.P.

Gopal Krishna Pandey vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lakki Kumar and 2 Others vs State of Up and 4 Others