Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Subhash Vidyarthi
Sandeep Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of the factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. quashing of trial under section 482 cr.p.c. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court observations underpinning the rationale for the dismissal of the application. (Para 9 , 25) |
| 4. arguments regarding civil dispute effect on quashing (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. application of section 319 cr.p.c. in summoning (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. criteria for exercising extraordinary power under section 319 (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 24) |
| 7. final dismissal of the application for lack of merit (Para 26 , 27) |
JUDGMENT :
Subhash Vidyarthi, J.
1. Heard Sri Digvijai Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, the learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.
2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the applicant has prayed for quashing of the order dated 05.06.2025 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge V/Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Gonda in Session Trial No. 1150/2022 ( State Vs. Vijay Singh and others ) arising out of Case Crime No.0148/2022, under Sections 307 r/w 34, 32
The court affirmed that a mere civil dispute does not justify quashing a summoning order under Section 319, provided sufficient evidence exists to support the summoning of an accused.
Point of law: for the exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. the use of word ‘evidence’ means material that has come before the court during an inquiry or trial by it and not otherwise. If from ....
Point of Law : Evidence of an injured eye-witness has greater evidential value and unless compelling reasons exist, their statements are not to be discarded lightly. As observed hereinabove while exe....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 319 Cr.P.C., emphasizing the need for evidence to form a prima facie view and the intent to ensure....
The court ruled that the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly and requires substantial evidence beyond a prima facie case to summon additional accused.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power under section 319 of Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly and only when there is much stronger evidence than mere probability of co....
The evidentiary value of an injured witness and the need for a speaking and reasoned order while rejecting an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. were central to the judgment.
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
