Rajan Rana and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:105342

Court No. - 77

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42263 of 2024

Applicant :- Rajan Rana And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for applicants and learned GA for the State.

¶7

The instant application has been preferred with a prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 18.9.2024 alongwith cognizance/summoning order dated 23.09.2024 as well as committal order dated 3.10.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly in Case No.14709 of 2024 (State vs. Rajeev Ran and others) as well as entire proceedings of Session Trial No. 619 of 2024 (Sessions Case No.2014 of 2024), arising out of Case Crime No.384 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 307, 427, 435, 323, 120B IPC and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Izzatnagar, District Bareilly pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Bareilly, in respect of applicants.

¶8

Brief facts of the case is that while opposite party no.2 was performing his duty as night patrolling officer, he was informed that a dispute is going on at Shankra Mahadeva Marble shop, near Bajrang Dhaba and subsequently firing between the two groups started whereafter the group headed by Aditya Uapdhyay set fire the two J.C.Bs and there was a chaos on the road side. The police controlled the situation after some time but both the groups fled away. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in the said incident, as many as 35 persons have been chargesheeted including the second applicant. It is further submitted that rival group has also filed F.I.R for the same incident. Submission of learned counsel for the applicants are two fold; (1) Regarding the same incident two first information reports have been lodged which is not permissible in the eye of law under Sections 162 Cr.P.C, and (2) This is a case of no injury and only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, applicants have been chargesheeted although, no role has been assigned to them. It is apparent from the records that by order dated 10.12.2025, learned counsel for the applicants were granted time to file documents by

¶9

way of an affidavit by the next date which has been filed alongwith supplementary affidavit.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the application and submitted that after conducting the detailed investigation, charge sheet has been submitted over which learned trial court took cognizance and as such, there is no illegality in the order impugned, but at the same time he did not dispute the fact that applicants are students and there is no criminal history against them.

¶11

After having the rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent that the allegations made through the First Information Report as well as implication of the applicants through charge sheet are general and vague in nature and after perusing their educational qualifications it is also apparent that applicants are students and due to pendency of the present case, their carrier will be spoiled and more so applicants are not habitual offender and there is no criminal history against them except the present case.

¶12

In view of the above, impugned charge sheet dated 18.9.2024 alongwith cognizance/summoning order dated 23.09.2024 as well as committal order dated 3.10.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly in Case No.14709 of 2024 (State vs. Rajeev Ran and others) as well as entire proceedings of Session Trial No. 619 of 2024 (Sessions Case No.2014 of 2024), arising out of Case Crime No.384 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 307, 427, 435, 323, 120B IPC and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Izzatnagar, District Bareilly pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Bareilly, in respect of applicants, are hereby set aside and quashed.

¶13

Accordingly, the present application is allowed .

¶14

The above consideration is being made by this court only on the basis of their educational certificate which have been produced by learned counsel for the applicants by way of filing supplementary affidavit through which it transpired that they are students and pursuing their higher education and considering the future of the applicants namely Rajan Rana and Ashish this order is being passed and the same shall not be taken as a precedent in any other case.

¶15

Order Date :- 1.7.2025 Rakesh

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajan Rana and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajan Rana and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

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