Shyamanand Chaubey @ S.N. Chaubey v. State of U.P. Thru. Superintendent Police Central Bureau Investigation Lko

Court No. - 16 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9972 of 2023 Applicant :- Shyamanand Chaubey @ S.N. Chaubey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Superintendent Police Central Bureau Investigation Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Singh Panwar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anurag Kumar Singh Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶1पቚኋरቕኍ कके वविदቚኋन अधधिविकቚኋ शቦኍ धिቦኍरर्ቖ धसिሺह पिሺविቚኋर तरቚኋ वविपकቦኍ-कर्ቖቦኍय अन्विकेषण ब्ययररो कके अधधिविकቚኋ शቦኍ अननुरቚኋग कनुमቚኋर धसिሺह कके सहቚኋयक अधधिविकቚኋ शቦኍ धिरमर्ቖ पतቚኋप धसिሺह करो सनुनቚኋ तरቚኋ पतቚኋविलቦኍ कቚኋ अविलरोकन वकयቚኋ।

¶2इस आररोप पत दቚኋरቚኋ पቚኋरቕኍ नके मनुकदमቚኋ अपरቚኋधि सिሺख्यቚኋ 1204 सनन् 2022 अन्तगरत धिቚኋरቚኋ 120B, 409, 420, 471, 477A भቚኋ०द०ववि० तरቚኋ ्ቝषቚኋचቚኋर वनविቚኋरण अधधिवनयम 1988 ककी धिቚኋरቚኋ 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d), रቚኋनቚኋ ए.सቦኍ.बቦኍ./सቦኍ.बቦኍ.आई धजिलቚኋ लखनऊ मर आररोप पत ककी विवै्ቕतቚኋ करो चनुननौतቦኍ दकेतके हहए उसके वनरस्त करनके ककी मቚኋिሺग ककी हवै।

¶3आररोप पत ककी विवै्ቕतቚኋ करो इस आधिቚኋर पर चनुननौतቦኍ दቦኍ गई हवै वक पቚኋरቕኍ वनदቖኘष हवै, उसकቚኋ करोई आपरቚኋधधिक इवतहቚኋस नहीሻ तरቚኋ उसनके वविविकेचनቚኋ मर सहयरोग वकयቚኋ हवै।

¶4"मቚኋननቦኍय सविቖኘच्च न्यቚኋयቚኋलय नके स्टकेट ऑफ हररयቚኋणቚኋ बनቚኋम भजिन लቚኋल 1992 Supp(1) SCC 335 मर करन वकयቚኋ हवै, जिरो इस पकቚኋर हवैह- "102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.

¶103We also give a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice."

¶5उपररोक वनणरय कቚኋ अननुपቚኋलन करतके हहए ऐसቚኋ करोई आधिቚኋर पतቦኍत नहीሻ हरोतቚኋ हवै जिरो पस्तनुत मቚኋमलके मर आररोप-पत कके वनरस्तቦኍकरण कके धलए कहके गए आधिቚኋरोሲ मर ककी गई आररोप पत वनरस्तቦኍकरण ककी शतቖኘिሺ मर सके वकसቦኍ भቦኍ शतर करो पयरቚኋ करतके होሲ।

¶6पቚኋररनቚኋ पत बल हቦኍन हवै तरቚኋ इस आधिቚኋर पर वनरस्त वकयቚኋ जिቚኋतቚኋ हवै।

7.यवद पቚኋरቕኍ वनयवमत जिमቚኋनत हकेतनु पቚኋररनቚኋ-पत पस्तनुत करतቚኋ हवै तरो उसके अवቇኌम जिमቚኋनत पቚኋररनቚኋ-पत कके वनरस्तቦኍकरण सके पभቚኋववित हहए वबनቚኋ, गनुण-दरोष कके आधिቚኋर पर वविधधि अननुसቚኋर सतर्ቖ कनुमቚኋर अिሺवतल बनቚኋम सቦኍ०बቦኍ०आई०

(2022) 10 SCC 51 मर पवतपቚኋवदत धसदቚኋिሺत कके अननुसቚኋर वकयቚኋ जिቚኋएगቚኋ। Order Date :- 12.10.2023 Himanshu High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench