Allahabad High Court
B.N. John And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 18 November, 2022
Author: Gautam Chowdhary
Bench: Gautam Chowdhary
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7401 of 2022 Applicant :- B.N. John And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajrshi Gupta,Shambhawi Shukla,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Heard Sri Dilip Kumar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 19.02.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/FTC, Court No.2, District Varanasi in Criminal Revision No. 199 of 2021 (K.V.Abraham Vs. State of U.P. and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 73 of 2020 under Sections 143, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Cantt. District Varanasi, whereby criminal revision filed by the opposite party no.2 has been allowed, setting aside the order dated 27.08.20221 by which final report no.01 of 2020 dated 02.02.2020 has been accepted.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that several proceedings, either civil or criminal were earlier initiated and is pending between the parties. He further submits that lastly a NCR dated 12.01.2020 was lodged against the opposite party no.2, which was converted into registration of the F.I.R dated 17.03.2020 lodged in Case Crime No. 282 of 2020, under Sections 506, 323, 504 I.P.C. and as a counter blast to the same, a first information report was registered by the opposite party no.2 against the applicants in which after investigation, final report no.01 of 2020 was submitted, which was accepted, vide order dated 27.08.2021. He further submits that against the order dated 02.02.2020 the opposite party no.2 preferred a revision before the learned revisional Court and the learned revisional Court allowed the same, setting aside the order dated 27.08.2021. Learned counsel further submits that the revisional Court without considering the factual and legal aspect of the matter has passed the order impugned in the most arbitrary and illegal manner and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed by this Court.
On the other hand, Sri Ashish Kumar Srivatava, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that the accused-applicants are influensive persons and that the final report was submitted in collusion with the investigating officer, without considering the fact that offence has been committed against which, revision was filed, which has been allowed after considering the entire facts and circumstances and thus the impugned order is perfectly legal, just and property, calls for no interference by this Court in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the order impugned, this Court is of the opinion, that learned counsel for the revisionist could not point out any good ground for quashing the order impugned.
Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the order impugned is refused.
However, the impugned order dated 19.02.2022 is modified to the extent that the proceedings as directed by the revisional Court may be decided by the learned trial Court as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, preferably within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of the order before it.
With the aforesaid directions, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed off.
Order Date :- 18.11.2022 S.Ali