Back
SAMIT GOPAL
Awadhesh Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Samit Gopal, J.
A. These two petitions/applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are connected together vide order dated 20.01.2023 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court as they are of the same applicant/accused and have common features of origin in themselves and as such are decided by a common order.
B. Criminal Misc. 482 Cr.P.C. Application No. 21392 of 2022
1. Heard Sri Sushil Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anil Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vikas Srivastava and Sri Namit Srivastava, learned counsels for the opposite party no.2, Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A-I for the State and perused the records.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Awadhesh Agarwal with the following prayers:-
The court emphasized that mere suspicion is insufficient to establish a conspiracy, requiring credible evidence for proceeding against an accused.
(1) Discharge of accused – At stage of consideration of such application for discharge, defence case or material, if produced at all by accused, cannot be looked at all – Court has to proceed with as....
The court held that criminal proceedings cannot be quashed solely based on claims of political rivalry; substantive evidence must guide such decisions.
At the initial stage, the truth, veracity, and effect of the evidence are not to be meticulously judged, and the accused's defense is not to be looked into when seeking discharge under Section 227 of....
The court emphasized that at the stage of framing of the charge, the trial court is required to evaluate the material and documents on record to determine if there is ground for presuming that the ac....
The power of quashing criminal proceedings should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, and listed several principles to be considered for proper exercise of jurisdiction, particularly with....
Point of Law : Once charges have been framed, the issue of discharge becomes redundant, as Courts have no jurisdiction to allow discharge after charges having been framed.
The jurisdiction for trial of an offence is determined by where the offence was committed, as per Section 177 Cr.P.C., and the court must ensure that proceedings are not an abuse of process.
The court emphasized that a discharge is warranted when the allegations do not establish a prima facie case, particularly in the absence of strong suspicion and material evidence linking the accused ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
