Allahabad High Court
Netrapal Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 July, 2024
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:111214 Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10622 of 2024 Applicant :- Netrapal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anwar Hussain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjeev Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Shri Anwar Hussain, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Sanjeev Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Shri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A-I for the State and perused the material brought on records.
3. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 10.01.2024 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Firozabad in S.T. No.164 of 2018 (State Vs. Brajesh Kumar u/s 306 and 406 IPC arising out of Case Crime No.605 of 2017, P.S. Jasrana, District Firozabad and further to direct the Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Firozabad to frame charges u/s 307, 302, 394 and 406 IPC after addition of charges u/s 307 and 394 IPC and converting Section 306 to 302 IPC.
4. The challenge in the present petition is to an order dated 10.1.2024 by which application paper no. 76-B of the informant has been rejected. The applicant is the informant of the present case. He moved an application before the trial court under Section 216 Cr.P.C. dated 4.1.2022 with the prayer that Section 307 and 394 IPC be added in the charge and Section 306 IPC be converted to Section 302 IPC and the accused be tried. The said application stood rejected by the trial court vide impugned order.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the approach of the trial court in dealing the said application is totally illegal and arbitrary inasmuch as the trial court has observed that the earlier applications moved by the applicant for the same prayer have already been rejected and in the case the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C has been recorded and at the said stage, moving of the said application is only with the intention to linger on the trial. It is submitted that as such the order impugned be set-aside and the prayers made in the said application be allowed.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned counsel for the state opposed the prayer for quashing.
7. After having heard learned counsel for both the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the trial court has passed a detailed order on the application of the applicant. The said application is the third application for the same prayer. Previous two applications were rejected by the trial court and the orders passed therein have attained finality. The stage of filing of the application is now when the trial is nearing completion, the trial court has in detail dealt with the said application and has observed therein that in the case the evidence of the prosecution has been completed, the statement of the accused has been recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and the case is being listed at the stage of arguments. It has further meticulously referred the merits of the matter also and also the fact that the previous two applications of the applicant for the same prayer were rejected and the said orders have attained the finality and as such there was no reason and occasion for it to interfere in the matter. The impugned order of the trial court does not suffer from any irregularity or illegality. There is no reason to interfere in the matter at this stage.
8. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 9.7.2024 Gaurav Kuls