Amar Jeet Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Court No. - 4 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38745 of 2023 Applicant :- Amar Jeet Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajan Tripathi Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State-respondents.

¶2The applicant has preferred the present Application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash the entire proceeding as well as the impugned cognizance order dated

19.08.2023 passed by the Special Judge, E.C. Act, Kanpur Nagar in Case No. 1051/2023, State vs. Amar Jeet Singh, arising out of Case Crime No. 1284 of 2020 under Section 135-1(a) of Indian Electricity Act (Amended), Police Station Anti Power Theft, District Kanpur Nagar as well as impugned charge-sheet no. 367 of 2023 dated 03.06.2023. Further to stay the entire proceeding of aforesaid case.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicants submits that no offence is made out against the applicant and the present prosecution has been instituted with a mala fide intention for the purpose of causing harassment.

¶4In the absence of any of the grounds which might justify the quashing of complaint or the impugned proceedings, the prayer for quashing the same is refused as I do not see any abuse of the courts process either. The summoning court has been vested with sufficient powers to discharge the accused even before the stage to frame the charges comes, if for reasons to be recorded it considers the charge to be groundless.

¶5After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant prays that the applicant be permitted to move appropriate application before the Court concerned as per provisions contained under the Cr.P.C.

¶6This prayer has not been opposed by the learned A.G.A.

¶7In view of the order proposed to be passed herein, no useful purpose would be served by putting the opposite party to notice and keeping this petition pending before this Court. However, in case the opposite party feels aggrieved by the order his/her right to seek modification/variation of the order is being kept reserved.

¶8Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant is permitted to appear before the concerned court within three weeks from today and move an application as per provisions contained under the Cr.P.C. claiming discharge. The concerned court shall after hearing the counsel decide the application on merits, in accordance with law, within a period which shall not exceed a period of two months from today.

¶9Till 30 December, 2023 or till the disposal of the aforesaid application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action will be taken against the applicant.

¶10If the concerned court after hearing the counsel for the accused feels persuaded to have the view that the accused ought not to have been summoned and the charge is groundless it shall not abstain from discharging the accused only on the ground that the material available at the time of summoning was the same which is available on record at the time of hearing the discharge application. On the other hand, if the lower court even after hearing the counsel for accused holds the view that the accused has been rightly summoned and the material brought on record does not indicate the charges to be groundless it shall make an order to that effect and proceed further in the matter, in accordance with law and shall also be free to adopt such measures to procure the attendance of the accused as the law permits.

¶11With the above observations, this application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 18.10.2023 Swati High Court of Judicature at Allahabad