C482/1710/2023
2023 Latest Caselaw 2473 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                        COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  C482 No. 1710 of 2023
                                  Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. S.R.S. Gill, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr. V.K. Gemini, Deputy A.G., for the State of Uttarakhand.

In pursuance to the FIR, being FIR No.1 dated 4th January, 2022, the initial allegation was with regard to the commission of offence under Sections 379, 406 and 457 of the IPC, as against the named accused persons, which included the present applicant too, along with the other co-accused persons Arjun Singh and Santokh Singh.

Initially, when the investigation was carried and a Chargesheet No. 4 of 2022 dated 6th March, 2022, was submitted, in which, the offences, which were said to have been established, were under Sections 380, 452, 147, 323, 504, 506 and 34 of the IPC, on which, after submission of Chargesheet No. 4 of 2022, the summoning order was issued against Kripal Singh and Mohd. Safi on 24th March, 2022.

The said issue was challenged, and ultimately, it was laid to rest by dismissal of C-482 Application at the behest of Mr. Kripal Singh in C482 Application No. 536 of 2022, Kripal Singh Vs. State of Uttarakhand others, by the judgment dated 8th May, 2023.

There is nothing on record to show, that the said judgment has been disturbed by any superior Court.

As far as the instant case is concerned, the cognizance, which has been taken is against the present applicant by an order dated 15th July, 2023, in Criminal Case No. 3624 of 2023, State Vs. Prakash Kashyap and another, which is based upon the subsequent chargesheet (i.e. supplementary chargesheet), being chargesheet No. 4A, which has been submitted by the Investigating Officer, where a specific role is shown to have been assigned to the present applicant, i.e. Sukhdev Singh Dhillon for commission of the offence under Section 380 of the IPC.

But, however, in the chargesheet or in the FIR, no recovery is shown to have been made from him except for the fact, that the recovery of the arms and cash was made from one Mr. Prakash Kashyap. Hence, with respect to the the present applicant only for the time being, it could be said that no offence under Section 380 IPC, could be apparently made out, though it will be subject to the counter affidavit to be filed by the Government Advocate.

The Government Advocate may file the counter affidavit within three weeks.

As far as the summoning order in relation to Sukhdev Singh Dhillon, is concerned, that will be kept in abeyance till the next date of listing.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) Dated 24.08.2023 Shiv