Allahabad High Court
Shanu @ Julfiqar Ali vs State Of Up And Another on 1 July, 2024
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:105868
Court No. - 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19330 of 2024
Applicant :- Shanu @ Julfiqar Ali
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sadaqat Ullah Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Mr. Sadaqat Ullah Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present application u/s 482 has been filed by the applicant to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 18.04.2012, cognizance/summoning order dated 01.07.2012, non-bailable warrant dated 30.01.2018 issued by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura as well as entire proceeding of Case No.3712/2012 (State Vs. Shanu @ Julfiqar Ali), arising out of Case Crime No.338 of 2012, under Sections 452, 354 I.P.C. & Section 3(1)XI SC/ST Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Mathura, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura.
3. Brief facts of the case are that an F.I.R. was lodged in the year 2012 against the applicant which was registered as case crime no.338 of 2012 in police station Kotwali, District Mathura, with the allegation that the applicant who resides in the neighbourhood of the informant, used to stare at his daughter, keeping an evil eye upon her and in the night of 01.04.2012 at about 4 AM, he entered the house of the informant and tried to outrage modesty of his daughter. The informant's daughter was sleeping and on being molested by the applicant she raised an alarm, hearing which, the applicant was caught by the informant and handed over to the Police. After investigation charge sheet was submitted on 18.04.2012. The concerned Court taking cognizance passed summoning order dated 01.07.2012 and non-bailable warrants have also been issued on 30.01.2018 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District-Mathura.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant challenging the aforesaid order submits that the order has been passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate taking cognizance under Sections 452, 354 I.P.C. & Section 3(1)XI SC/ST Act, which is not justified as under the special Act the CJM concerned does not have power to do the same. Placing reliance upon judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sharif Ahmed And Another Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh And Another, 2024 INSC 363, he submits that non-bailable warrant has wrongly been issued by Chief Judicial Magistrate in the aforesaid order.
5. Learned A.G.A. for the State, on the other hand, submits that the charge sheet has been submitted in the year 2012 as well as summoning order has been passed in the same year. There is no whisper as to why after delay of so many years the aforesaid order has been challenged. He, therefore, contends that present application has been filed only to delay the proceedings of above mentioned case. It is also submitted that present application is barred by laches. Moreover the laches in filing the present application have not been explained. In support of his submission, he has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court passed in case of Northern Indian Glass Industries Vs. Jaswant Singh & ors., reported in AIR 2003 SC 234, wherein the Apex Court has held that the High Court cannot ignore the delay and laches in approaching the Court and there must be satisfactory explanation by the petitioner/applicant as how he could not come to the Court well in time. He further submits that there is no illegality or infirmity in the aforesaid orders passed by learned CJM.
6. Learned AGA further submits that the aforesaid judgement placed by learned counsel for the applicant is not applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the case.
7. This Court is of the opinion that prima-facie, the concerned court below has not committed any illegality in rejecting the application of the applicant. There is no illegality or infirmity in the aforesaid impugned orders by the concerned court below.
8. In view of the above, the aforesaid prayer as made by learned counsel for the applicant for setting aside the orders impugned dated 01.07.2012 and 30.01.2018 as well as entire proceeding of the case is refused and the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed accordingly.
Order Date :- 1.7.2024
Rahul.
