Allahabad High Court
Madhuri Tiwari vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 December, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 88 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43313 of 2018 Applicant :- Madhuri Tiwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- P.K. Singh,A.C.Tiwari(Ac),Ankit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed to quash the order dated 05.09.2018 to the extent not summoning the opposite party no.2 to 7 under Section 392 I.P.C. and further to stay the proceedings of Sessions Trial No.25 of 2012 (State Versus Ram Lal and others) arising out of Case Crime No.326-A of 2009 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Chaubeypur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.7, Kanpur Dehat.
On an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. of applicant the F.I.R. registered as Case Crime No.326-A of 2009 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 504 I.P.C. was lodged against opposite party nos. 2 to 7. After investigation charge-sheet was submitted under Sections 147,148, 323, 324 and 504 I.P.C. During the course of evidence an application was moved by the complainant (prosecution) to amend the charge and charge under Sections 452/392 I.P.C. be also framed against the accused persons. Learned trial court by the impugned order dated 05.09.2018 has partly allowed the application only for framing charge under Section 452 Cr.P.C. and has refused to frame charge under Section 392 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that in the statement before the court the prosecution witnesses has corroborated the allegations of the F.I.R. that accused persons snatched the golden chain from the neck of Madhuri Tiwari, but despite the aforesaid evidence the trial court has not considered the prayer of the applicant to frame charge under Section 392 I.P.C.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer.
Impugned order is revisable. The proper remedy for the applicant was to file revision against the impugned order. The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable.
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed as not maintainable.
The interim order dated 06.12.2018 passed by this Court is hereby vacated.
Order Date :- 2.12.2022 MN/-