SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(All) 123

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Vikas Kunvar Srivastav, J.
Lalman & Another - Applicants
Versus
State of U.P. & Another – Opposite Parties
U/S 482/378/407 No. 776 OF 2021
Decided On : 18-02-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicant : Nijam Ahamad

The court's decision emphasized that charges can be framed in a criminal case even on the basis of serious suspicion against the accused, and the court must consider the evidences collected by the prosecution to determine if they are sufficient to raise suspicion against the accused.

Headnote:

Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Quashing of Order - Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. - [Sameness of Matter in Two FIRs] - [Section 239 Cr.P.C.] - [Section 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C.] - The court discussed the scope and ambit of Section 239 Cr.P.C. and the extent to which the Magistrate is required under the law in deciding the issue of discharge. The court relied on various cases to conclude that in a criminal case, charges can be framed even on the basis of serious suspicion against the accused. The court found that the impugned orders of the court below did not suffer from any vice and were well reasoned and speaking orders, in conformity with the requirement of law as provisioned under Section 239 Cr.P.C.

Fact of the Case:

The applicants sought to quash the order dated 16.12.2020 passed by the Sessions Judge and the order dated 21.1.2020 passed by the Judicial Magistrate in a criminal case registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. The applicants argued that the same matter was the subject of two FIRs and sought discharge based on the sameness of the matter in the two FIRs.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there were strong grounds to frame charges against the accused persons. Both the impugned orders were well reasoned and speaking orders, in conformity with the requirement of law as provisioned under Section 239 Cr.P.C.

Issues: The main issue was whether the impugned orders of the court below suffered from any vice and if the discharge application on the ground of sameness of matter in two FIRs was justified.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the scope and ambit of Section 239 Cr.P.C. and various case laws to conclude that the impugned orders did not suffer from any vice and were well reasoned and speaking orders.

Final Decision: The court rejected the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and directed the Deputy Registrar (Criminal) to communicate the order of Court immediately through e-mail to the trial court.

JUDGMENT :

Vikas Kunvar Srivastav, J.

1. The case is called out.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. pressed before the Court by learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Nijam Ahmad, on behalf of the applicants-Lalman and Durga Prasad. A copy of the application has already been served in the office of learned G.A., pursuant thereto learned A.G.A. appear to protest the same.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record, the prayer made in the application, invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to the effect, to quash the order dated 16.12.2020 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Ambedkar Nagar in Criminal Revision No.30/2020 (Umesh Vishwakarma & Ors. Vs. State of U.P.) and order dated 21.1.2020 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar in Criminal Case No.4265/2019 (State Vs. Sabha Narayan & Ors.) arising out of Case Crime No.30/2019 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station- Jalalpur, District-Ambedkar Nagar.

The Factual Matrix

4. The materials available on record reveals that the applicant nos.1 and 2 are amongst the accused involved in Case Crime No.30/2019 referred hereinabove, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C. The impugned order is passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar on 21.1.2020 on an application of the present applicants along with the other co-accused Umesh Vishwakarma and Narendra Dev moved on 7.12.2019 under Section 239 Cr.P.C. for their discharge.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that, the said application for discharge was moved before the court, pursuant to the order of this Court passed over application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the impugned charge sheet dated 10.6.2019 filed in Case Crime No.30/2019 under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., the relevant portion of the said order is reproduced hereinunder :-

    "After arguing the matter up to some length, learned counsel for the applicants submit that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicants may be permitted to move discharge application through counsel and suitable directions may be issued for expeditious disposal of the same.

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.

In view of above, it is provided that applicants permitted to move their discharge application(s) through counsel within four weeks' from today and in case any such application(s) are being filed, same shall be heard and decided expeditiously after hearing the parties, in accordance with law, by means of a 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 applicants in the aforesaid case."

Discharge application on the ground of sameness of matter in two FIRs.

6. Pursuant to the above order of this Court, discharge application dated 7.1.2019 under Section 239 Cr.P.C. (Annexure No.7), was moved before the Court of Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar, where the case was pending. The applicants set forth, before the court, the grounds and reasons for their discharge that there is a crime case no.371/2016 registered under Section 420 and 465 I.P.C. already lodged in respect of the 'sale deed dated 3.11.2016' by one Gaurav Kumar on 26.12.2016 against the same accused (present accused-applicants) with the other co-accused persons in same Police Station-Jalalpur, District -Ambedkar Nagar. After due investigation, charge-sheet was filed therein under Section 420 and 465 I.P.C. which is pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Fast Track/A.C.J.M., State Vs. Umesh Vishwakarma & Ors., bearing Criminal Case No.192/2018. The said criminal case is at the stage of evidence. In the said criminal case, the charge-sheet filed by the investigating officer contains the name of 'Meda Devi' in the column of witnesses,

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top