Ranjit Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:135988

Court No. - 82

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22037 of 2025

Applicant :- Ranjit Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Abhishek Tiwari, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Sunil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for applicant and Sri R.N. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.

¶8

The instant application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 24.07.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 29.07.2024 in Criminal Case No. 59/977 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 24 of 2024 (New 01 of 2024) under Section 12 P.C. Act, Police Station Civil Lines, District Meerut pending before Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, P.C. Act, Meerut.

¶9

Brief facts of the case:

¶10

FIR of the present case was lodged on 18.01.2024 against applicant and co-accused Manoj Kumar for offences under Sections 7, 13(1)(b) and 13(2) P.C. Act and as per FIR applicant was Peon in Social Welfare Department and he made demand of bribe of Rs. 75,000/- from the complainant to release his and his friend's installment and thereafter co-accused Manoj Kumar, the Supervisor was apprehended red handed by the Trap Team while he was receiving bribe from the complainant. In the FIR it is further mentioned that co-accused Manoj Kumar, the Supervisor at the time of his arrest disclosed the complainant that applicant made demand of bribe on his instructions.

¶11

After registration of the FIR investigation was commenced and after investigation charge-sheet was filed against applicant and coaccused Manoj Kumar in the present matter on 29.07.2024 and from the charge-sheet it reflects, it was filed against applicant for

¶12

offence under Section 12 P.C. Act and after submission of the charge-sheet cognizance was taken by the court concerned on 29.7.2024. Hence the instant application.

¶13

Submissions advanced on behalf of applicant:

¶14

Learned counsel for applicant submits, applicant is Peon in the concerned department and he was not having any authority to release the alleged fund of the complainant and even from the statement of co-accused Manoj Kumar, it is apparent that applicant made demand of bribe from the complainant on his instruction but in spite of that charge-sheet has been filed against him and cognizance has been taken.

¶15

He further submits, however, FIR of the present case was lodged for offences under Section 7 and 13 P.C. Act but charge-sheet was filed against applicant for offence under Section 12 P.C. Act and cognizance has also been taken with regard to offence under Section 12 P.C. Act and as per Section 12 P.C. Act whoever abets any offence punishable under the provisions of P.C. Act then only he can be punished for offence under Section 12 P.C. Act but there is no evidence on record which can suggests that applicant in any manner abeted for the alleged offences committed by the coaccused Manoj Kumar, the Supervisor.

¶16

He next submits, therefore, charge-sheet filed against applicant and cognizance taken by the court concerned is bad.

¶17

Submissions advanced on behalf of State:

¶18

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer and submits, applicant was instrumental in commission of present offence and he was the person who made demand of bribe, therefore, from the allegations leveled against him it cannot be said that no offence under Section 12 P.C. Act is made out against him, therefore, there is no illegality in the charge-sheet submitted against applicant and cognizance taken by the court concerned, therefore, instant application is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶19

Analysis:

¶20

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶21

The instant application has been filed by the applicant under Section 528 B.N.S.S. to quash the charge-sheet filed against him in

¶22

the present matter and cognizance taken by the court concerned.

¶23

The power of this Court in quashing the charge-sheet as well as proceedings pending against an accused has been discussed in number of celebrated decisions of Apex Court including R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab 1960 SCC OnLine SC 21 and State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and others 1992 SCC (Cri) 426 and from perusal of these judgments it reflects, very sparingly in rarest of rare cases this Court can exercise its power either under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or 528 B.N.S.S. for quashing of charge-sheet.

¶24

In case at hand, it reflects, applicant was posted as Peon in the Social Welfare Department and he made demand of bribe from the complainant and thereafter co-accused Manoj Kumar, the Supervisor was apprehended red handed by the Trap Team and he disclosed that on his instructions applicant made demand of bribe from the complainant and after investigation considering the evidence available on record charge-sheet has been filed against applicant under Section 12 P.C. Act and thereafter court concerned took cognizance. Therefore, core question before this Court in the instant application is that even if entire allegations leveled against applicant are accepted then also whether offence under Section 12 P.C. Act is made out against him or not.

¶25

Before arriving at any conclusion it will be beneficial to reproduce Section 12 of The Prevention of Corruption Act which defines punishment for offence of abetment:-

¶26

"12. Punishment for abetment of offences- Whoever abets any offence punishable under this Act, whether or not that offence is committed in consequence of that abetment, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years, but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine."

¶27

Therefore, from perusal of Section 12 of P.C. Act it is apparent that if someone abets any offence punishable under the provisions of P.C. Act whether or not that offence is committed in consequence of that abetment shall be punished for offence under Section 12 P.C. Act.

¶28

Considering the allegation leveled against applicant in considered view of this Court, prima facie offence under Section 12 P.C. Act is made out against him as he was the person who abeted for commission of offence under Section 7 of P.C. Act.

¶29

Therefore, considering the above facts, case of applicant does not fall in any of the categories mentioned either in the case of R.P.

¶30

Kapur or Bhajan Lal (supra).

¶31

Therefore, from the discussion made above, in view of this Court, the instant application is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed .

¶32

Order Date :- 11.8.2025 AK Pandey

¶33

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ranjit Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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