Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ISRAR AHMADM versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Israr Ahmadm v. State Of U.P. - APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 7589 of 1989 [2007] RD-AH 1937 (7 February 2007)

 

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. 48)

Criminal Misc. Application  No.  7589 of 1989

***

Israr Ahmad son of  Syed Masoom Ali,

Resident of Villge Chakchandapur, Police

Station Suriyawan,  District

Varanasi. ..........  ...Accused- Applicant.

Vs.

1. State of U.P.

2. Sub Divisional Magistrate/ Naib Tehsildar

Varanasi. . ...... Opp.parties

*************

Hon'ble Barkat Ali Zaidi, J

1. In these proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant seeks quashing of the first information report , registered against him under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and Rules 3/57 of Mines and Minerals Rules, 1967.

2. I have heard Sri  S.M.A. Abidi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.K. Maurya,  Addl. Government Advocate for the State.

3. The contention of the applicant is that he is  neither the proprietor nor has anything to do with the brick - kiln  and one Sri Syed. Ansar Ahmad is the proprietor which runs the brick-kiln . These facts have been mentioned in affidavit accompanying the petiton.

4. The contention of the applicant, therefore, is that his prosecution is, therefore, wholly unwarranted  because he has nothing to do with brick-kiln . This contgention will have to be examined by the Trial Court on the basis of order or documentary evidence adduced before him, and, it will be for him to decide as to who is to be prosecuted for commission of the offences , if any?.

5. It is not for this Court in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to decide the matter.

6. The applicant will be at liberty to move an application for discharge before the Trial Court.

7. In the circumstances, pending decision by the Trial Judge, the applicant shall be released on personal bonds.

8. It may, however b e mentioned  that the prosecution of the person running the brick-kiln under the Essential Commodities Act seems unjustified because the mere use of coal in running the brick-kiln will not violate the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. and others  Vs. B.  Janta Ind. Udyog and others, A.I.R.1991 Supreme Court, 477.

9. With this observation, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of finally.

Dt:  7.2. 2007

  n.u.


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.