Fareed vs Sahjad And Another
2011 Latest Caselaw 422 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 54
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8798 of 2011
 

 
Petitioner :- Fareed
 
Respondent :- Sahjad And Another
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Anil Mullick
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Ravindra Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant  and learned A.G.A.

This application has been filed with a prayer to quash the order  dated 20.1.2011 passed by learned  Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 17, Meerut in S.T. No. 584 of 2010 whereby  discharge application filed by the applicant has been rejected without considering the merits of the case.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the learned court below was directed to dispose of the discharge application by this Court vide order dated 11.3.2010 in Crl. Misc. Appliction No. 32140 of 2009. In pursuance of that order, the discharge application was moved, but the trial court has rejecting the same without considering the merits of the case and, thereafter charge has been framed. The order dated 20.1.2011 rejecting the discharge application is illegal and the same may be set aside.

Considering the sunmissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and having perused the record, it appears that in the present case learned Additional Sessions Judge has framed charages under Section 498A, 328 I.P.C. read with Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Prior to that the discharge application has already been rejected. The order rejecting the discharge application does not appear to be a reasoned order. In the present case, the charge has  already been framed. After framing the charge, considering such application is not proper but without interfering in the charge framed by the trial court, it is directed that the discharge application filed by the applicant may be heard and disposed of by passing a fresh order.

Till then, the order rejecting the discharge application dated 20.1.2011 shall be kept in abeyance. In case the trial court comes to the conclusion that after disposing of the discharge application the charge framed by the trial court requires any amendment, the same may be considered.

With the above direction, this application is finally disposed of.

Order Date :- 18.3.2011

Naresh