Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

AJIT SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ajit Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 3093 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 2696 (20 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. 10

                    Crl. Misc. Application no. 3093 of 2007

Ajit Singh and another . . . .  . . . . . . . .  . . .  . . .   . .   . . .Applicants.

                                 Versus

The State of U.P. and another .  . . . . .  . .. .  . . . . . . . .   .Opp.Parties.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

        ----

Hon'ble R.K. Rastogi,J.

This is an application under section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings  of Crl. Misc. Case no. 74 of 2005, Ved Prakash Vs. Surjeet Singh alias Bhippi and others, under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. police station Gursarai district Jhansi pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Garautha district Jhansi.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned  A.G.A. for the State at the admission stage and this case is being  finally disposed of at this stage.

The facts relevant for disposal of this application are that Ved Prakash O.P. no.2  filed an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the applicants Ajit Singh and Surjeet Singh in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Garautha district Jhansi which was registered  as Crl. Misc. Case no. 74 of 2005. The application was moved  in respect of  offences punishable under sections 452, 323 , 506 and 504 I.P.C. and the learned Magistrate passed an order on this application directing the Station Officer of the concerned police station  to register and investigate the matter. Thereafter the F.I.R. was registered at the police station at case crime no. 424 of 2005.The police after investigation of the case submitted a charge sheet  against the accused under sections 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. only. It was registered as Crl. Case no. 143 of 2006 in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Garautha. The learned Magistrate took cognizance  on the charge sheet and summoned the accused persons.

Now this application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved  to quash the proceedings of the above case.

The applicants have pleaded  in  the affidavit filed in support  of the application  that district Jhansi is a scheduled  dacoity affected  area and so cognizance of the offence  under section 452 I.P.C. could  be taken by the Special Judge ( Dacoity Affected Areas)  only and so the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to pass any order in this case.  These pleas have been taken in paras 3 and 4  of the affidavit.

It is to be seen  that the offence punishable  under section 452 I.P.C. involves  house trespass having made preparation to cause hurt,  and it has got no concern with dacoity. I have also perused the entire application moved under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. There is no allegation  of dacoity of any sort  in the entire application. As such there is no force in this contention of the applicants that the matter was cognizable  by the Special Judge ( Dacoity Affected Areas ) and that Magistrate has no jurisdiction to take cognizance  in the matter and  to entertain the application under section156(3) Cr.P.C. His above contention has got no force  and is liable to be rejected.

The learned counsel for the applicants  further submitted that according to the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. an incident of beating  had taken place  on 22.11.2005, but a perusal of the injury report reveals that  the injured was medically  examined on 24.12.2005 and so entire allegation made in the application are unreliable and concocted.  

However, the learned A.G.A. submitted in reply that it has been stated  at the top of the  injury report  in third line that the injured was  medically examined on 24.11.2005 at 9.30 A.M. and it appears that there has been some  clerical mistake in the date  below signature of  the doctor at the end of the report  where  the  date 24.12.05 has been written. He further pointed out that the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was itself moved on 5.12.2005 and in its para 4 it was written that the applicant and his brother Ram Prakash were medically examined on 24.11.2005. He further submitted that  this plea regarding so-called  contradiction between the ocular version and the medical evidence can be taken by the accused applicants before the trial court.

In this way the applicants have not been able to make out any case for quashing  the proceedings of the criminal case. However, it is to be seen that in this case the charge sheet  has been submitted under sections 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. which are non-cognizable offences and so  under the explanation  to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., the  report of a police officer  in such a case shall be deemed to  be a complaint and the police officer by whom the report is made  shall be deemed to be the complainant. So  the Magistrate shall proceed  with the trial of the case as complaint case.

The application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of subject to above observations  regarding trial of the case.

Dated:20.2.2007

RPP.


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.