JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned AGA.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned order dated 05.04.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Agra in Sessions Trial No.235 of 2022 (State vs. Shivanshu Mudgal and others), arising out of Case Crime No.478 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 506 IPC at Police Station Shahganj, District Agra.

3. It is the case of the applicant that a first information report has been lodged on 03.11.2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307 IPC at Police Station Shahganj, District Agra in Case Crime No.478 of 2021 by the first informant against 11 accused persons pertaining to the alleged occurrence dated 02.11.2021.

4. On dated 07.01.2022, the opposite party no.2 filed his Vakalatnama to privately oppose the defense in the sessions trial by engaging five Advocates, who are all leading Senior Advocates of the District Court at Agra, two Vakalatnama were filed on the same date wherein a total of ten Advocates were shown to be engaged by the opposite party no.2, again on 22.04.2022 and 20.05.2022, two more Vakalatnama were filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2 showing the engagement of Sri Ashok Kumar Gupta, Sri Shishupal Singh Yadav and Sri Naresh Pal Singh Yadav as his Advocates, opposite party no.2 had virtually engaged the entire Criminal Bar of the District Court at Agra, most of the said Advocates being the leading criminal law practitioner of the District Court at Agra.

5. The very relevant aspect as highlighted by the Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant that in the aforesaid Vakalatnama dated 07.01.2022, the Advocate Welfare Ticket with the required stamp was not affixed, in which out the five Advocates, the name of Sri Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate was also there.

6. The Vakalatnama as submitted by the opposite party no.2 only got the signatures of the Advocate on the Vakalatnama but sofar as Sri Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate is concerned, no documents pertaining to the case were provided to him by the opposite party no.2 and neither he was ever instructed to appear on behalf of the opposite party no.2 during the trial.

7. In absence of complete instructions, Sri Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate neither opposed the bail application of the accused and nor did he advanced any arguments on behalf of the opposite party no.2, moreover, Sri Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate never got any instructions from the opposite party no.2 inasmuch as neither the facts of the case was discussed by the opposite party no.2 with the aforesaid Advocate, nor any documents pertaining to the case were given by the opposite party no.2 and as such, Sri Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate who never appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2 on any date fixed by the learned court concerned at the time of hearing of the trial, only he was engaged on dated 13.02.2023 through Vakalatnama numbered as 47-B on behalf of the applicant by Sri Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate and Sri Manish Pathak, Advocate.

8. The co-accused person, namely, Syed Zafar Rizvi @ Shanu also engaged Sri Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate along with Sri Manish Pathak, Advocate as their counsels before the Sessions Trial No.235 of 2022 through Vakalatnama dated 03.03.2023 and the said Vakalatnama was numbered as 56-B.

9. The Vakalatnama dated 07.01.2021 as filed by the opposite party no.2 was not only defective but also Sri Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate was not being given complete instructions by way of any documents relevant to the case by the opposite party no.2, Sri Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate submitted an application on 06.03.2023 before the learned District and Sessions Judge, Agra and the same was numbered as Application No.58-B with the prayer for withdrawal of his Vakalatnama earlier preferred in Sessions Trial No.235 of 2022 on behalf of