Vinod Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 23792 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:174417
 
Court No. - 89
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 31800 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Vinod Kumar
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Srivastava
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

1. Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Sachchida Nand Ojha, Advocate, on behalf of the opposite party no.2, is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sachchida Nand Ojha, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State.

3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 16.04.2022, cognizance order dated 15.06.2022 as well as entire proceedings of Case No.4297 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No.208 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 506 I.P.C. PS Sector 24, Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Gautam Buddh Nagar.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is not named in the FIR. From the statement of witness no offence under alleged section is made out against the applicant. Applicant is an old man. He next submits that injury report filed with the application is also simple in nature and not grievous. No role of assault has been made against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance in Sunil Kumar vs. State of U.P. & another in Criminal Appeal No.2255 of 2023 @ Special Leave Petition (Crl) No.4405 of 2018) decided on 03.08.2023. The reliance placed by learned counsel for the applicant is based on entirely different facts and it is not applicable in the present case.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the submission raised by learned counsel for the applicant and submits that all the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant are disputed question of facts which cannot be examined at this stage.

6. Considered the arguments raised by learned counsel for the applicant and perused the entire records. Submissions raised by learned by learned counsel for the applicant are disputed question of facts and sitting under 482 Cr.P.C. jurisdiction, this Court has no power to examine the facts.

7. In view of the above, in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the matters of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, no ground for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case, is made out which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.

8. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 29.8.2023

SKD