Allahabad High Court
Mitrasen Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 21 January, 2010
Author: Alok K. Singh
Bench: Alok K. Singh
Court No. - 28 Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 3554 of 2009 Petitioner :- Mitrasen Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- Rajiv Singh Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate,Mohd. Babar Khan Hon'ble Alok K. Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner and counter affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.2, the first informant of this case filed today are taken on record.
Let rejoinder affidavit be filed within a week.
List in the week commencing 08.02.2010.
Learned counsel for the first informant i.e. opposite party no.2 submits that as averred in para 3 the name of the present petitioner was mentioned inadvertently in the application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. on the basis of which the F.I.R. has been lodged and after investigation the charge-sheet was submitted. He says that the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was not recorded. It is pointed out that the petitioner happens to be an aged person of 76 years of age who had been earlier a Member of Parliament. It is said that his son Sri Anand Sen Yadav was indeed present at the time of occasion but no the petitioner who is otherwise also old and infirm person.
In view of the above, as an interim measure it is provided that till the next date of listing the process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. issued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance.
Order Date :- 21.1.2010 PAL/