Anil Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3221 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 14
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9665 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Anil Singh
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P.Lko. And Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted before the Court that the complaint filed by the applicant a summoning order was passed against the opposite party no.2 to 14 which is pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Lalganj, Pratapgarh of Criminal Complaint Case No.188/2017 u/s 323, 325, 326, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Lalganj, District Pratapgrah.

Learned counsel has submitted that this case is connected with State vs. Sunil Singh relating to Crime No. 202 of 2015 (S.T. No. 478 of 2016) u/s 302, 307, 452, 323, 504, 506, 374 IPC and 3 (2) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Lalganj, District Pratapgarh which is pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Pratapgarh.

Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that this is the cross case version of ST No.478 of 2016 and further submitted that on behalf of the applicant side injury occurred on the same date of incident. So the interest of justice is that the trial of this complaint case should commence with S.T. No.478 of 2016 which is pending before learned Sessions Court.

Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant as per section 323 Cr.P.C. which is read as under:

"If, in any inquiry into an offence or a trial before a Magistrate, it appears to him at any stage of the proceedings before signing judgment that the case is one which ought to be tried by the Court of Session, he shall commit it to that Court under the provisions hereinbefore contained and thereupon the provision of Chapter XVIII shall apply to the commitment so made."

This fact proved that the case of the applicant is pending before Judicial Magistrate, Lalganj, Pratapgarh and this fact is also not disputed with this complaint case that is cross version of S.T. No.478 of 2016, Case Crime No.202 of 2015. So it is desirable that trial of both the cases should be done by same Court. If the applicant moved the application u/s 323 Cr.P.C. then it is expected that the learned Judicial Magistrate pass the appropriate order after keeping the provision u/s 323 Cr.P.C.

With aforesaid observation, this petition is disposed of.

Order Date :- 1.2.2023/Arpan