Pradyumn Pandey @ Manish Pandey vs State Of U.P. And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 5930 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 66
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39943 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Pradyumn Pandey @ Manish Pandey
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Imran Ullah,Amrit Raj Chaurasiya
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

Heard Mr. Imran Ullah, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.

Perused the record.

Challenge in this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to the charge sheet dated 12.04.2022 submitted in Case Crime No. 0002 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 328, 386, 368, 302, 201 and 147 IPC, Police Station-Bariyapur, District-Deoria, the Cognizance Taking Order/Summoning Order dated 13.04.2022 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.-17, Deoria in Criminal Case No. 3756 of 2022 (State Vs. Pradyumn Pandey @ Manish Pandey) under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 147, 328, 386, 368, 302, 201 and 120B IPC, Police Station-Bariyapur, District-Deoria, as well as the entire proceedings of Consequential Sessions Trial No. 184 of 2022 (State Vs. Pradyumn Pandey) under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 328, 386, 368, 302, 201 and 147 IPC, Police Station-Bariyapur, District-Deoria now pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Deoria.

Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 05.01.2022, a delayed FIR dated 06.01.2022 was lodged by first informant-opposite party 2-Ramesh Mishra and was registered as Case Crime No. 0002 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 328, 386, 368, 302, 201 and 147 IPC, Police Station-Bariyapur, District-Deoria. In the aforesaid FIR, 5 persons namely - (1) Arun Kumar Singh, (2) Pradyumn Pandey, (3) Punit Shahi, (4) Arvind Kumar Pandey and (5) Hridya Shankar Yadav have been nominated as named accused whereas 2 to 3 unknown persons have also been arraigned as accused.

After lodging of aforementioned FIR, Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of concerned case crime number in terms of Chapter-XII Cr.P.C. During course of investigation, Investigating Officer examined first informant and other witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. On the basis of above and other material collected by Investigating Officer during course of investigation, he came to the conclusion that prima-facie complicity of applicants is established in the crime in question. Accordingly, Investigating Officer submitted the police report (charge sheet) dated 12.04.2022 in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. whereby applicant has been charge-sheeted under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 328, 386, 368, 302, 201 and 147 IPC. Subsequently, it appears that the matter was further investigated in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. On the basis of additional material collected by Investigating Officer, he submitted a supplementary police report dated 18.08.2022 whereby 2 other persons namely Govind Mishra and Ramesh Mishra were charge sheeted under Sections 302, 201, 120B, 193, 34 IPC whereas, the complicity of the following 5 persons was not found to be established in the crime in question;- (1) Arun Kumar Singh S/o Late Daya Shankar Singh, R/o Bhatwaliya Nath Nagar, Ward No.-4, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Deoria, (2) Pradyumn Pandey S/o Sanjay Pandey, (3) Puneet Sahi S/o Umesh Narayan Sahi, (4) Arvind Kumar Pandey S/o Lal Bahadur Pandey, R/o Pipra Chandrabhan, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Deoria and (5) Daya Shankar Yadav S/o Chandan Dev Yadav, R/o Sonu Ghat, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Deoria.

After submission of the supplementary police report dated 18.08.2022 in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoria, no order of committal has yet been passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoria. As a result of aforesaid while on the one hand, the prosecution is proceeding against applicant in the pending Sessions Trial referred to above, no consequential order can be passed by the court of Sessions in the light of the new material that have emerged on the record of aforementioned case crime number.

On the aforesaid premise, Mr. Imran Ullah, the learned counsel for applicant submits that the issue as to what shall be the procedure adopted by the Court upon submission of two police reports in a given case crime number is no longer res-integra and stands settled by the judgment of Supreme Court in Vinay Tyagi Vs. Irshad Ali (2013) 5 SCC 762. Paragraphs 41 and 42 of the said judgment are relevant for the controversy in hand. For ready reference, the same are extracted hereinunder:-

"41. Having discussed the scope of power of the Magistrate under Section 173 of the Code, now we have to examine the kind of reports that are contemplated under the provisions of the Code and/or as per the judgments of this Court. The first and the foremost document that reaches the jurisdiction of the Magistrate is the First Information Report. Then, upon completion of the investigation, the police are required to file a report in terms of Section 173 (2) of the Code. It will be appropriate to term this report as a primary report, as it is the very foundation of the case of the prosecution before the Court. It is the record of the case and the documents annexed thereto, which are considered by the Court and then the Court of the Magistrate is expected to exercise any of the three options afore-noticed. Out of the stated options with the Court, the jurisdiction it would exercise has to be in strict consonance with the settled principles of law. The power of the magistrate to direct 'further investigation' is a significant power which has to be exercised sparingly, in exceptional cases and to achieve the ends of justice. To provide fair, proper and unquestionable investigation is the obligation of the investigating agency and the Court in its supervisory capacity is required to ensure the same. Further investigation conducted under the orders of the Court, including that of the Magistrate or by the police of its own accord and, for valid reasons, would lead to the filing of a supplementary report. Such supplementary report shall be dealt with as part of the primary report. This is clear from the fact that the provisions of Sections 173 (3) to 173(6) would be applicable to such reports in terms of Section 173(8) of the Code.

42. Both these reports have to be read conjointly and it is the cumulative effect of the reports and the documents annexed thereto to which the Court would be expected to apply its mind to determine whether there exist grounds to presume that the accused has committed the offence. If the answer is in the negative, on the basis of these reports, the Court shall discharge an accused in compliance with the provisions of Section 227 of the Code."

In the light of above, the learned counsel for applicant contends that the proper court for the Sessions Judge was to deffer the trial till the committal of the case by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoria, after submission of the supplementary police report dated 18.08.2022.

It is only thereafter that the Sessions Judge should proceed against applicant but first deciding the issue as to whether on the basis of material accompanying police report, a case for discharge is made out or a case for proceeding with the applicant is made out.

Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the present application. However, he could not dislodge the legal submission urged by the learned counsel for applicant at this stage.

Having heard, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court find that no useful purpose shall be served in keeping this application pending.

Accordingly this application is disposed off finally with the following directions.

Direction No. -1 :- The concerned Sessions Judge shall deffer the proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 184 of 2022 (State Vs. Pradyumn Pandey) under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 328, 386, 368, 302, 201 and 147 IPC, Police Station-Bariyapur, District-Deoria till the committal of the case by the Chief Judicial Magistrate in view of the supplementary charge sheet dated 18.08.2022 submitted by Investigating Officer in the same case crime number.

Direction No.-2 :- The Chief Judicial Magistrate, who is seized of the matter, pertaining to the supplementary charge sheet dated 18.08.2022 submitted in Case Crime No. 0002 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 328, 386, 368, 302, 201 and 147 IPC, Police Station-Bariyapur, District-Deoria shall pass appropriate orders of committal within a period of One month from the date of the receipt of a photo copy of this order which shall be filed by applicant before Chief Judicial Magistrate by means of a notary affidavit.

After the committal order has been passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate in the light of the police report dated 18.08.2022, the concerned Sessions Judge shall proceed to decide the matter in respect of applicant in the light of the directions contained in paragraphs 41 and 42 of the judgment of Supreme Court in Vinay Tyagi (Supra).

With the aforesaid directions, this application stands finally disposed off.

Order Date :- 23.2.2023

Vinay