Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DAYA SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Daya Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 15114 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 20982 (13 December 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

COURT NO. 45

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT  PETITION NO. 15114 OF 2006

Daya Singh..........................................Petitioner.

                                         Versus

State of U.P and others ..............................Respondents.

Hon. Mrs. Poonam Srivastav, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The petitioner is an accused in a criminal case no. 24504 of 2004, State Vs. Daya Singh arising out of case crime no. 52 of 1999 under sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., which is pending in the court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar. During continuation of the trial, the petitioner/accused moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. bringing to the notice of the court that a number of other persons were also involved in the case.  On perusal of the statement of P.W.1 and P.W.2 recorded during the trial. The learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate vide order dated 30.10.2006 summoned the cashier M.N. Dixit to face the trial along with the petitioner.  This order was challenged in revision and the same has been dismissed by the Incharge Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar on 20.11.2006.

I have perused both the orders challenged in the instant writ petition.  I do not find any illegality in the same.  It is sole discretion of the court concerned to arrive at a conclusion after evidence is recorded during the trial as to whether other persons appear to be involved in the case or not? In the event he reaches at a conclusion that some other persons also appear to be involved in the case, he can very well summon those persons under Section 319 Cr.P.C.  The learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate summoned the cashier M.N. Dixit to face the trial but no other person whose names were mentioned in the application moved at the instance of the accused.  No good ground for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is made out. The writ petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Dt. 13.12.2006

rkg


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.