Allahabad High Court
Shyam Veer Singh Alias Prempal Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 19 March, 2025
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40093 Court No. - 70 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7070 of 2025 Applicant :- Shyam Veer Singh Alias Prempal Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Joshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Mukesh Joshi, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party No. 1.
2. Perused the record.
3. Applicant-Shyam Veer Singh Alias Prempal Singh who is first informant has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 528 BNSS with the following prayer:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash the order dated 03.02.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.1, Moradabad in session case no. 1752 of 2022 (State Vs. Sachin), Under Section 376, 452, 506 IPC and 5/6 POCSO Act, arising out of case crime no. 125 of 2022, Police Station Mundhapandey, District Moradabad and pleased to summon the Scientific Officer (D.N.A.) of FSL U.P. Ghaziabad, who has conducted the D.N.A. test pertaining to the case crime no.125 of 2022.
It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the further proceeding of session case no. 1752 of 2022 (State Vs. Sachin), Under Section 376, 452, 506 IPC and 5/6 POCSO Act, arising out of case crime no. 125 of 2022, Police Station-Mundhapandey, District Moradabad, pending in the court of learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.1, Moradabad, during the pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court.
And/or may pass such other and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
4. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection by contending that in view of the provisions contained in Section 293 Cr.P.C. exemption is granted from proving scientific evidence. On the above premise, he therefore, contends that the application dated 03.12.2024 under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the first informant/applicant herein before court below was wholly misconceived. As such, no illegality has been committed by Court below in passing the impugned order dated 03.02.2025. Consequently, the present application is liable to be rejected.
5. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application are not only borne out from the record but furthermore the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record. As such, no good ground exists to entertain the present application.
7. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.
8. It is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.3.2025 Jaswant