IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RAJEEV MISRA, J.
Chaudhary Pratap Singh and another – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and another - Respondents
Criminal Misc. Application No. 1541 of 2022
Decided on : 17-01-2023
Correction - Criminal Proceedings - Section 482 Cr.P.C., Sections 354B, 323, 504, 506 IPC - The court addressed clerical errors in a previous order and emphasized the importance of timely FIRs, ruling that delays without explanation can undermine prosecution.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants challenged a charge-sheet and subsequent criminal proceedings for alleged assault and harassment, claiming the FIR was lodged with significant delay and lacked proper explanation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the prosecution to be false and malicious, highlighting the unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's statements.
Issues: Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and the statements made in a prior court order affect the validity of the current criminal proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that unexplained delays in FIRs can lead to the dismissal of charges, especially when prior court statements contradict ongoing criminal allegations.
Result: The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10426 of 2020 are hereby quashed.
JUDGMENT :
Rajeev Misra, J.
Criminal Misc. Correction Application No. 7 of 2023
Heard Mr. Amit DagA, the learned counsel for applicants and the learned A.G.A. for state.
2. This correction application has been filed seeking correction in the order dated 4.1.2023
3. Perused the correction application.
4. Upon perusal of correction application, this Court finds that there are numerious clerical mistakes in the order dated 4.1.2023.
4-A. For the facts and reasons noted above and as mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of correction application, the same is liable to be allowed.
5. In view of above, instead of making corrections in the order dated 4.1.2023, a corrected order is being passed. The same is being uploaded on the Website of the High Court Allahabad and the same be treated as the correct copy of the order dated 4.1.2023.
''Case : APPLICATION under Section 482 No. 1541 of 2022
Applicant : Chaudhary Pratap Singh and another
Opposite Party : State of U.P. and another
Counsel for Applicant : Amit Daga
Counsel for Opposite Party : G.A.,Mehul Khare
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra, J.-Heard Mr. Amit Daga, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned AGA for State and Mr. Vinay Saran the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Mehul Khare, the learned counsel for first informant/opposite party-2.
2. Perused the record.
3. Present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging Charge-sheet No. 13 of 2020 dated 27.5.2020 submitted in Case Crime No. 26 of 2020 under Sections 354B, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. P.S. Mahila Thana, District Moradabad, Cognizance Taking Order/Summoning Order dated 24.7.2020 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. (CAW), Moradabad in consequential Criminal Case No. 10426 of 2020 (State of U.P. v. Chaudhary Pratap Singh and others), under Sections 354B, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. P.S. Mahila Thana, District Moradabad as well as the entire proceedings of above mentioned criminal case, now pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. (CAW), Moradabad.
4. Record shows that in respect of an incident, which is alleged to have occurred on 14.1.2020, Smt. Priyanka Chaudhary, first informant/opposite party-2 lodged a delayed F.I.R. dated 8.3.2020, which was registered as Case Crime No. 26 of 2020 under Sections 354B, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. P.S. Mahila Thana, District Moradabad. In the aforesaid F.I.R., four persons namely Pratap Singh, Yash Chaudhary, Sapna Chaudhary and Sushil Chaudhary have been nominated as named accused.
5. The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R is to the effect that on 14.1.2020 when first informant/opposite party-2 alongwith her Nanad Babita Chaudhary were going to Buddhi Bihar for urgent work then named accused are alleged to have intercepted and thereafter, assaulted the first informant and her nanad. Named accused are also said to have dislodged the modesty of first informant/opposite party-2.
6. After registration of aforesaid F.I.R., Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of afore-mentioned case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C.. Investigating Officer first examined first informant/opposite party 2, Priyanka Chaudhary under Section 161 Cr.P.C., who has supported the FIR. Thereafter, Investigating Officer examined Lalit Kumar, Raj Bala and Babita Chaudhary under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Aforesaid witnesses have also supported the FIR. On the basis of above and other material collected by him during course of investigation, Investigating Officer opined to submit a charge-sheet. Accordingly, he submitted the charge-sheet dated 27.5.2020, whereby named accused have been charge-sheeted under Sections 354B, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. Thereafter Court below has taken cognizance upon the aforesaid charge-sheet and simultaneously summoned the charge-sheeted accused vide summoning order dated 24.7.2020, passed in aforementioned State-case.
7. Feeling aggrieved by aforesaid, applicants who are named/charge-sheeted accused have now approached this C
Ahmad Ali Quraishi v. State of U.P.
Apren Joseph v. State of Kerala
Krishna Lal Chawla and others v. State of U.P. and another
Mukesh v. State (NCT of Delhi)
P. Rajagopal v. State of Tamilnadu
Phool Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Rajiv Thapar and others v. Madan Lal Kapoor
AI
Unexplained delays in lodging FIRs can undermine the prosecution's case, leading to quashing of charges.
The evidence produced by the accused in his defense cannot be looked into by the court at the pre-trial stage. The court's power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings is to prevent ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a prima facie case to be made out against the accused and the limitations on the court's power to appreciate evidence at the pr....
Unexplained delay in lodging an F.I.R. can undermine the prosecution's case, leading to quashing of proceedings.
The prosecution cannot proceed where allegations reflect a civil dispute and lack evidence of criminal conduct, as per principles from SC/ST Act precedents.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.