Nausahd And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2019 Latest Caselaw 6196 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24845 of 2019
 

 
Applicant :- Nausahd And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

Heard Sri Sandeep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri A. D. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 14.03.2019 passed by A.C.J.M. IInd Amroha in Criminal Case No. 3806 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No. 288 of 2016, under Section 420 I.P.C., Police Station- Amroha Dehat, District- J.P. Nagar (Amroha), State vs. Shanavaj and others, pending in the court of A.C.J.M., IInd J.P. Nagar (Amroha), and a prayer is also made to stay the proceedings in this case till the disposal of this application.

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated. The application for discharge has been wrongly dismissed.

As per the F.I.R., opposite party no. 2 had sold his vehicle in favour of accused-applicant no. 1 and all the papers pertaining to the sale of the said vehicle including Form No. 29/30, were given to the accused-applicant no. 1, after being signatured and permission was given by him appearing before the R.T.O. for transfer of the said vehicle in favour of the applicant and thereafter, he came back from the R.T.O. office. On 02.09.2015, he went to the R.T.O office to find out why the said vehicle could not be transferred in the name of accused-applicant no. 1, it transpired that on the said Form No. 29/30, name of purchaser was mentioned as Shanavaj (applicant no. 2) and address was also mentioned of his house, because of which the vehicle could not be transferred in the name of accused-applicant no. 1. Thus, it is alleged in the F.I.R. that the accused-applicant had made manipulation in the Form No. 29/30, after the same was executed by him.

After the investigation in this case, charge-sheet has been submitted against the accused-applicants under the above mentioned sections.The discharge application has already been dismissed by the trial court vide order dated 14.03.2019. Since the From No. 29/30 which was filled up by the opposite party no. 2 was subsequently tampered with/ filled up again therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is committed by the accused-applicant and the evidence gathered by Investigating Officer during investigation cannot be scrutinized in the proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

In view of the above observation, I do not see any infirmity in the impugned order dated 14.03.2019, by which the discharge application has been rejected. Accordingly the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

Order Date :- 9.7.2019

V.S.Singh