Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Vinod Kumar, Ias vs Union Of India on 29 June, 2021
Bench: Uday Umesh Lalit, Indira Banerjee, Ajay Rastogi
1
ITEM NO.28 Court 3 (Video Conferencing) SECTION X
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s). 255/2021
VINOD KUMAR, IAS Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.68106/2021-STAY APPLICATION and
IA No.68109/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.68108/2021-
PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES and IA No.68112/2021-
APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING ORIGINAL VAKALATNAMA/OTHER
DOCUMENT )
Date : 29-06-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI
For Petitioner(s) Ms. Sonia Mathur, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sachin Sharma,AOR
Mr. Sushil Kumar Duber Adv.
Mr. Vidishi Kumar Adv
Mr. Noor Rampal, Adv.
Mr. Puneet Pathak, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
This petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution seeks quashing of Criminal complaints/FIRs mentioned in Annexure P-3. Annexure P-3 in turn refers to 28 cases filed or initiated against the petitioner including cases listed at Sl. Nos. 12 and 24 Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Indu Marwah Date: 2021.07.02 where conviction was recorded against the petitioner on 24.09.2018 12:47:09 IST Reason:
and 10.08.2018 respectively.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no reason 2 to entertain this petition under Article 32. The petitioner, if so advised, can always file appropriate applications under the Code of Criminal Procedure (“The Code”, for short) seeking quashing of the individual criminal cases or complaints.
At this stage, Ms. Sonia Mathur, learned Senior Advocate submits that the petitioner had approached the High Court on earlier occasions filing applications under Section 482 of the Code which were later withdrawn.
The law on point as held by this Court in “Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal Vs. Mohan Singh & Ors.” reported in SCC (1975) 3 706 is clear that dismissal of an earlier 482 petition does not bar filing of subsequent petition under Section 482, in case the facts so justify.
Needless to say that as and when any appropriate application under the Code is preferred by the petitioner, the same shall be dealt with purely on its own merits without being influenced by the dismissal of the instant writ petition.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(SWETA BALODI) (VIRENDER SINGH) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER