Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Samit Gopal, J.
Awadhesh Agarwal – Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Opposite Parties
Application U/S 482 No. - 21392 of 2022, Application U/S 482 No. - 37671 of 2022
Decided On : 20-09-2024
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Discharge of accused - Applications filed to quash orders rejecting discharge pleas under Section 227 - The court found insufficient grounds for proceeding against the applicant, leading to the quashing of the criminal proceedings - The applicant was not named in the FIR and was implicated based on suspicion and old enmity - The court emphasized that mere suspicion is inadequate for establishing a conspiracy. (Paras 1, 17)
(B) Criminal Conspiracy - Section 120-B IPC - The court reiterated that the essence of conspiracy requires an agreement between parties to commit an illegal act, which must be supported by credible evidence - The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the applicant, leading to discharge. (Paras 8, 12)
Facts of the case:
The applicant was implicated in a case of attempted murder based on an FIR lodged against unknown persons, later naming him due to suspicion of conspiracy stemming from old enmity. (Paras 3, 4)
Findings of Court:
The court found no credible evidence linking the applicant to the alleged conspiracy, emphasizing the need for substantial proof rather than mere suspicion. (Paras 12, 17)
Issues: The main issues were whether there was sufficient ground for proceeding against the applicant and the adequacy of evidence to support the charges of conspiracy. (Paras 10, 11)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prosecution's evidence was insufficient to establish a prima facie case of conspiracy, leading to the conclusion that the proceedings against the applicant were an abuse of process. (Paras 12, 17)
Result: Applications allowed; proceedings quashed. (Paras 17, 18)
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:-
It is further prayed that this Hon’ble Court may also be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 12.10.2022 passed by aforesaid Ld. Trial court whereby and where under the charges u/s 307 IPC r/w S. 34 and 120-B IPC have been framed/drawn against the accused-applicant.
And by way of interim measure and during pendency of present application before this Hon’ble Court, it is further prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay further the impugned criminal proceedings of Session Trial No. 541 of 2018 (arising out of Case Crime No. 256 of 2015) u/s 307, 34, 120-B IPC, P.S. MM Gate, District Agra (State Vs. Vishal and others) pending currently in the court of Ld. Addl. District and Session Judge, Court No. 23, Agra pending as against the accused-applicant only, otherwise he shall suffer irreparable loss.”
3. The present case started on a FIR which was lodged by Nem Kumar Jain on 22.11.2015 at 23:00 hours under Sections 307/34 IPC in connection with an incident which took place on the same day i.e. 22.11.2015 at about 21.45 hours against unknown persons alleging therein that he has a shop in the name of C.V. Chain’s Ltd. at Joota Ram Phatak, Kinari Bazar, Police Station Kotwali and is permanent resident of Mukhani Gali, Gud Ki Mandi, Police Station M.M.Gate and his elder brother Dhan Kumar Jain sits with him in the shop. On 22.11.2015 at about 9.30 p.m. his elder brother after closing the shop left from there on a Swift Car and was coming to the house by passing Sidhi Bazar and when he reached Mukhani Gali at his house then his gunner Kushal Kumar opened the door of the car and his brother Dhan Kumar Jain came out from car at about 9.45 p.m. and at that time 4-5 unknown persons on two motorcycles came from Phulatti Bazar side and in front of the house of his brother shot him with an intention to murder him. While firing they ran towards gud ki mandi. He immediately took his brother on the car to G.G. Nursing Home and got him admitted where his treatment is going on. He suspects that due to his work of jewellery the persons who have been attacking them since last two years are involved in the present incident in which 4-5 persons have fired upon jewellers and for their share they have tried to murder his brother. A report be lodged against unknown persons and they be punished.
4. The police on investigating the matter apprehended one person Yogesh Gautam on 24.11.2015 who gave his statement that Dhan Kumar was shot by Pramod S/o Devi Singh and at that time private gunner of Dhan Kumar had also fired
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
