Gulsher @ Sappu vs State Of U.P. And Anr.
2019 Latest Caselaw 6635 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 66
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2985 of 2019
 

 
Revisionist :- Gulsher @ Sappu
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Mirza Ali Zulfaqar,Sri Nazrul Islam Jafri, Senior Advocate
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Mirza Ali Zulfaqar, learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present Criminal Revision (under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C.) has been filed for against the impugned judgment and order dated 9.7.2019 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Rampur in Session Trial No. 114 of 2019 (State vs. Gulsher @ Shappu and another), arising out of Case Crime No.132 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 307, 302, 504, 34 I.P.C., P.S. Swar, District- Rampur.

Submission of the learned counsel for the revisionist is that the application moved on behalf of the revisionist for discharging him on the ground that on the date of incident he was not present at the place of incident and had demonstrated before the court that, in fact, he was present in Gujarat in support thereof several air tickets, boarding pass and all relevant documents were filed. However, the learned Judge has not considered the same and illegally rejected the application by the impugned order. Therefore, the order impugned may be quashed.

Per contra, Sri Pankaj Saxena, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing the impugned order and has submitted that at the stage of framing of charge it is well settled that roving and fishing enquiry is impermissible. If the contention of the accused is accepted, there would be a mini trial at the stage of framing of charge. That would defeat the object of the Code. It is well-settled that at the stage of framing of charge the defence of the accused cannot be put forth. Therefore, learned Judge has not committed any illegality or impropriety while rejecting the application moved on behalf of the revisionist.

Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., in my opinion, the learned Judge has rightly rejected the application moved on behalf of the revisionist for discharging him.

The present criminal revision is bereft of merits and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 1.8.2019

Vikas