Smt. Sadhana Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 18101 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 84
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26109 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Smt. Sadhana Singh And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Vishnu Dayal Agarwal,Sandhya Agarwal
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pashali Slolanki,Satyendra Narayan Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

Heard Sri Vishnu Dayal Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

Learned counsel for the applicants wants the Court to read statements of witnesses recorded during investigation of one FIR to quash the proceedings of other FIR though both are cross versions as the same would be in teeth of judgement passed by Supreme Court in A.T. Mydeen and another vs. The Assistant Commissioner, Customs Department, 2921 SCC OnLine 1017 wherein it has been held that the essence of the above synthesis is that evidence recorded in a criminal trial against any accused is confined to the culpability of that accused only and it does not have any bearing upon a co-accused, who has been tried on the basis of evidence recorded in a separate trial, though for the commission of the same offence.

The other argument that order whereby applicants are summoned was not a reasoned order that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the applicants is bereft of merit as it is not a case arising out of a police report and since learned court has mentioned that summons are issued after perusal of case diary is sufficient that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the applicants.

I view of above discussion, I not find any illegality in the order impugned as well as in the criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 200 of 2022 under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 447 IPC, Police Station Dhooman Ganj, District Prayagraj.

Accordingly, the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

However, if the applicants appear before the court concerned within a period of three weeks and file bail application, the same shall be considered in accordance with law after taking note of the judgment of Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773 if there is no legal impediment.

Order Date :- 21.11.2022

Puspendra

(Serial No. 40 out of 417 fresh cases)