Unknown vs Ankit Kumar" Has
2023 Latest Caselaw 1820 UK

               Office Notes,
              reports, orders
SL.          or proceedings or
      Date                                          COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No            directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures

                                 C482 No.1394 of 2023
                                 Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, learned counsel for the applicant.

Mr. Tumul Kumar Nainwal, learned Brief Holder for the State.

The learned Senior Counsel for the applicant after quite an elaborative argument in relation to the challenge given to the proceedings of Criminal Case No.25 of 2022, "State Vs. Ankit Kumar" has submitted that an offence under Section 420 and 506 of the IPC is not made, owing to the fact that there is already a pending civil proceedings, where the complainant/ respondent has filed a suit for specific performance and the same is still pending consideration. It is under that pretext that since the FIR was registered after the rejection of the miscellaneous appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the CPC, the proceedings instituted by way of FIR No.27 of 2021 dated 17.01.2021 would be bad in the eyes of law.

In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court as rendered in R. Nagender Yadav Vs. State of Telangana and Another reported in (2023) 2 SCC 195. However, factually the said judgment would not be attracted for the reason being that, the status of Mr. Nagender Yadav, therein in the aforesaid proceedings, were with regards to the implications of a pending civil proceedings qua the criminal case, was from the perspective that the applicant was only an attesting witness of the sale deed and he also happens to be the cousin of complainant. Its factually an entirely different matter which was then being dealt with by the Hon'ble Apex Court and which has ultimately observed so vide its conclusion drawn in paragraph no.19 of the judgment.

The said principle will not be attracted herein in the instant case for the reason being that in the FIR, there is a specific allegation that the applicants have indulged themselves in selling the same set of property to different persons and duping them of their valuables by illegal extraction of the sale consideration, which otherwise the property, which was not subjected to sale.

This Court is of the view that, in order to arrive at a rightful conclusion as to the innocence of the present applicant, the C482 Application may not be an appropriate forum available to him.

In that eventuality, he is directed to surrender before the trial Court i.e. Judicial Magistrate-II, Haridwar and seek his bail in accordance with guidelines framed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, as reported in 2022 (10) SCC 51.

Upon his surrender, his bail application would be considered, as per paragraph no.3 (e) of the judgment, which relates to the offences falling under 'A' category of offences.

Subject to the aforesaid, the C482 Application stands dismissed.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 13.07.2023 Sukhbant