Aditya Singh @ Aditya Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Aditya Singh @ Aditya Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Exemption from personal appearance: the applicant may appear before the trial court through counsel until the stage of recording of his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., subject to his counsel keeping appearances on fixed dates and cooperating in the proceedings; on non-cooperation the trial court may pass appropriate orders. Otherwise the trial is to proceed in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition against dismissal of the applicant's discharge application (charges under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC) warranted interference, given that charges had been framed before the discharge application could be heard, notwithstanding the earlier liberty granted by this Court. +1 more

Court's answer

On the particular facts of the case, the Court directed that the trial court may proceed in accordance with law; the dismissal of the discharge application was not reopened or set aside.

Ratio / Principle

Appearance of the applicant before the trial court shall be admissible through counsel until the stage of recording of the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., provided the counsel for the applicant keeps appearing on the dates fixed and cooperates in the proceedings.

Key takeaways

In case of non-cooperation of the applicant in the progress of the trial, the trial court will be at liberty to pass appropriate orders against him.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal - Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition - discharge application dismissed after framing of charges - appearance through counsel permitted. Accused-applicant, facing charges under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, had been permitted by an earlier order of this High Court dated 13/06/2025 (Application U/S 482 No. 4926 of 2025) to file a discharge application within four weeks, with protection from coercive steps meanwhile; the discharge application was filed within time, yet charges were framed before it could be heard, and the ACJM-IV, Lucknow dismissed it on 17/09/2025 on the ground that charges stood framed and the case was fixed for evidence. Before Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J., the Court did not disturb the dismissal: it directed that the trial court may proceed in accordance with law, but ordered that the applicant's appearance before the trial court shall be admissible through counsel until recording of the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., conditioned on his counsel continuing to appear on the dates fixed and cooperating in the proceedings; upon non-cooperation, the trial court was left free to pass appropriate orders against him. Application disposed of accordingly (order dated June 15, 2026 as printed). Single-judge order; no precedent engagement; no quantum involved.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9484 of 2025

Aditya Singh @ Aditya Pratap Singh

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amar Nath Dubey, Ankit Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 12

HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.

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

The instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the accused-applicant against the impugned order dated 17/09/2025 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- IV, Lucknow whereby the discharge application filed by the applicant from the charges under sections 323, 504, 506 IPC has been dismissed inter alia, on the ground that the charges are already framed and the case is fixed for evidence.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the discharge application was filed by the applicant in light of liberty granted by this Court vide order dated 13/06/2025 passed in APPLICATION U/S 482 NO. 4926 of 2025 " Aditya Singh @ Aditya Pratap Singh versus State of UP and another" in which the applicant was permitted to move discharge application within four weeks from the date of order. It was also observed that in case any such application(s) is/ are being filed, the same shall be heard and decided expeditiously after hearing the parties in accordance with law, by means of reasoned and speaking order. Till the aforesaid period of four weeks and during pendency of discharge application, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that pursuance to

A482 No. 9484 of 2025

2

the said order dated 13/06/2025, the applicant filed discharge application before the learned trial court within the stipulated period. However, before hearing on discharge application, charges were framed contrary to the direction issued by this court. He next submitted that the case is fixed for remaining evidence of PW-1.He is the student of MCA and 'C' Certificate holder of NCC. He has been falsely implicated in the case due to ulterior motive.

On particular facts of the case, it is directed that the trial court may proceed in accordance with law, but appearance of the applicant shall be admissible before the trial court through counsel till the stage of recording of the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. provided that the counsel for the applicant will keep on appearing on the dates fixed and cooperate in the proceedings before the trial court. In case of non cooperation of the applicant in progress of trial , the trial court will be at liberty to pass appropriate orders against him.

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of accordingly.

(Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)

June 15, 2026

dk/

Digitally signed by :- DEVENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench