Allahabad High Court
Himanshu Kulshratra vs State Of U.P. And Another on 22 November, 2024
Author: Raj Beer Singh
Bench: Raj Beer Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:182758
Court No. - 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21380 of 2024
Applicant :- Himanshu Kulshratra
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ayush Mishra,G.A.,Sunil Kumar Misra
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2/complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the order dated 21.05.2024, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra, in Criminal Case No. 850 of 2010 (State vs. Subodh Kumar and Others), under Sections - 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 I.P.C., Police Station - New Agra, District- Agra, whereby the application filed by applicant has been rejected.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has filed an application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C., challenging the proceedings of aforesaid case, wherein by order dated 03.12.2010, this Court has directed that till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant in aforesaid case. It was stated that in pursuance to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2018) 16 SCC 299, the trial court has passed order dated 03.11.2022 and non-bailable warrants were issued against applicant. The applicant has filed an application that in view of law laid down vide order dated 29.02.2024, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 3589 of 2023, appropriate order may be passed but that application has been rejected by the trial court vide impugned order dated 21.05.2024. It was submitted that impugned order is against law and thus, liable to be set aside.
4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has vehemently opposed the application and submitted that as the earlier application, filed by applicant under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is still pending, thus the instant application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. The applicant has remedy to seek appropriate relief in earlier aforesaid application, which is pending before this Court. Further, by order dated 03.12.2010, this Court has directed that no coercive action was to be taken only till next date and the said interim order was never extended further. Learned counsel has also referred order dated 10.07.2023, passed in Application u/s 482 No. 24226 of 2023 and submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order.
5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.
6. Perusal of record shows that the applicant and others have filed an application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. No. 38252 of 2010, wherein by order dated 03.12.2010, notice was issued to the opposite party no.2 and the opposite parties were granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit and one week was granted to applicants for filing rejoinder affidavit and that the case was directed to be listed after aforesaid period. It was further directed that till next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against applicants. It appears that in view of law laid down in case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (supra), the trial court has issued non-bailable warrants against applicant by order dated 03.11.2022. The applicant has filed an application dated 21.05.2024 with prayer that in view of law laid down in case of High Court Bar Association Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No. 3589 of 2023), decided by Hon'ble Apex Court on 29.02.2024, the order dated 03.12.2010, passed by this Court be complied with. That application was rejected by the trial court vide impugned order dated 21.05.2024. The trial court has observed that the order dated 03.11.2022 was already passed before the judgment dated 29.02.2024, passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court and there is nothing to show that the said judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court would apply to earlier orders. Here, it would be pertinent to mention that the earlier application filed by applicant under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. (Application u/s 482 No. 38252 of 2010) is still pending and by order dated 03.12.2010, the interim protection was granted only till the next date of listing. It appears that the said interim protection was never extended further. In view of these facts and circumstances, whether coercive process was rightly issued against applicant-accused or not, the same can only be considered by the Court in the earlier application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 38252 of 2010. The applicant is at liberty to raise his plea in proceedings of Application 482 Cr.P.C. No. 38252 of 2010. In view of aforesaid, no case for invoking inherent powers under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. is made out. Thus, the instant application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. is liable to be dismissed.
7. Accordingly, the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 22.11.2024
S Rawat
