Varis Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11998 of 2023 Applicant :- Varis Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Pal Singh,Ambrish Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2The present application has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 05.10.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C), Court No.37, Barabanki in Sessions Trial No. 1176/2020 (State vs. Jumman Ali & Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 219/2020 under sections 323, 504, 506, 304 I.P.C., Police Station-Satrikh, District-Barabanki; for directing the learned trial court i.e. learned Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C), Court No.37, Barabanki to decide the application under section 319 Cr.P.C. afresh and summon the opposite party no.2 for facing trial.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant submits that private respondent was named in the F.I.R. of the case in question but name of private respondent was dropped by Investigating Officer and the case was committed to the court of session. He further submits that after framing of charge, the statement of witnesses were recorded, in which, they categorically stated the role of private respondent for giving life threat and exhortations, thereafter, the application U/s 319 Cr.P.C. was moved by applicant but the same was rejected by learned trial court in the most mechanical manner. It is further submitted that the injury was caused by accused persons with wooden stick on the head of Imran, as a result, he died. It is, thus, submitted that indulgence of this Court is required.

¶4Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of applicant and submits that there is no illegality in the order passed by learned trial court as it is evident from the deposition of the witnesses that one injury was caused by accused persons on the head of the victim but no specific role of any accused is found in their deposition. He further submits that after detailed investigation, the name of private respondent was dropped by the Investigating Officer and all these facts have already been considered by learned trial court, hence, there is no illegality in the order passed by it. He relies on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case if Vikas Rathi vs. State of U.P. reported in (2023) Livelaw SC 172 and submits that if there is no cogent or direct evidence then the alleged persons cannot be summoned merely on the basis of presumption.

¶5Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of application as well as other relevant documents; it is evident that only one injury was found on the head of deceased and there is no specific allegations for causing injury to private respondent. In such circumstances, there is no illegality in the order passed by learned trial court.

¶6With the above observations, this Court is of the view that the present application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and accordingly, stands dismissed. Order Date :- 11.12.2023 Arpan High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench