Allahabad High Court
Sunil Verma And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 22 December, 2023
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:242885
Court No. - 65
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16855 of 2021
Applicant :- Sunil Verma And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Pratik J. Nagar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kumar Dhananjay
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
(Ref:- Order on Criminal Misc. Clarification Application No. 2 of 2023)-
1. Heard Mr. Pratik J. Nagar, the learned counsel for applicants, Mr. Prashant Kumar, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Kumar Dhananjay, the learned counsel representing first informant.
2. This clarification application has been filed by applicants-Sunil Verma and Smt. Anuradha Verma seeking clarification.
3. Present application came up for orders on 23.09.2021 and this Court passed the following order:-
"Heard Mr. Pratik J. Nagar, learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A. for State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging summoning order dated 08.03.2021 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Meerut in Case No. 3921 of 2021 (State of U.P. Vs. Sunil Verma and another), under Sections 381, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Lalkurti, District Meerut, arising out of Case Crime No. 0023 of 2020, under Sections 506, 504, 471, 468, 467, 420, 408 and 381 IPC, Police Station Lalkurti, District Meerut, as well as entire proceedings of above mentioned criminal case now pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Meerut.
Learned counsel for applicants contends that applicants are innocent. Applicants have been falsely implicated in above mentioned case crime number. Allegations made in F.I.R. are false and concocted. Business rivalry has been dragged into criminal litigation. It is also submitted that F.I.R. has been lodged with delay. However, there is no explanation in the F.I.R. regarding delay in lodging F.I.R. It is thus urged that since delay in lodging the F.I.R. has not been explained in F.I.R., therefore, by virtue of judgement rendered by Apex Court in P. Rajagopal and others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 2019 SC, 2866, present criminal proceedings cannot be sustained and therefore liable to be quashed by this Court. Further submission is that present criminal proceedings are malicious and therefore an abuse of process of Court. Consequently, same are liable to be quashed by this Court.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and Mr. Kumar Dhananjay, learned counsel representing opposite party 2 have opposed this application.
Having heard learned counsel for applicants, learned A.G.A. for State, Mr. Kumar Dhananjay, learned counsel representing opposite party 2 and upon perusal of material brought on record, matter requires consideration.
Notice on behalf of opposite party No. 1 has been accepted by learned A.G.A. Mr. Kumar Dhananjay has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party 2.
They pray for and are granted four weeks time to file their respective counter affidavits.
Applicants will have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit.
List for admission before the appropriate Bench after expiry of aforesaid period.
further orders of this Court, further proceedings of Case No. 3921 of 2021 (State of U.P. Vs. Sunil Verma and another), under Sections 381, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Lalkurti, District Meerut, arising out of Case Crime No. 0023 of 2020, under Sections 506, 504, 471, 468, 467, 420, 408 and 381 IPC, Police Station Lalkurti, District Meerut, now pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Meerut, shall remain stayed."
4. Subsequent to above order dated 23.09.2021, court below by placing reliance upon the judgment of Supreme Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd Vs. C.B.I., 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1014, has opined that since a period of more than 6 months has expired from the date of order dated 23.09.2021, therefore, in view of aforementioned judgment of Supreme Court, the said interim order has now come to an end. Accordingly, bailable warrants have been issued against applicants.
6. Consequently, aforementioned clarification application has been filed. Mr. Pratik J. Nagar, the learned counsel for applicants submits that the law laid down by Apex Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd (Supra), has now been referred to the Constitution bench for re-determination and the judgment has been reserved. He, therefore, contends that in view of the aforesaid anomalous situation, the liberty of the applicants be protected.
7. Learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel representing first informant do not dispute the legal submission urged by the learned counsel for applicants.
8. In view of above and for the facts and reasons earlier recorded in the order dated 23.09.2021, it is provided that coercive process issued against applicants shall remain in abeyance.
9. With the aforesaid directions, this clarification application stands finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 22.12.2023
Vinay
