Allahabad High Court
Satyendra Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 7 January, 2021
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 89 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 80 of 2021 Applicant :- Satyendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State.
Perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 23.10.2020 passed by First Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha in Case No.1281 of 2020 (State Vs. Tarun and others) arising out of Case Crime No.86 of 2020, under Sections 323, 325 & 504 I.P.C., Police Station Amroha Dehat, District Amroha.
Perusal of record shows that during pendency of above mentioned criminal case, applicant filed an application dated 18.9.2020 praying therein that one Sumit @ Amit be also summoned as accused. Aforesaid application was filed on the ground that earlier the Investigating Officer had submitted a charge sheet and in the subsequent charge sheet the name of Sumit @ Amit has been excluded from the charge sheet as an accused.
Court below examined the matter and upon perusal of record has concluded that the first charge sheet in which Sumit @ Amit was nominated as accused was submitted by the Investigating Officer for approval before the Circle Officer, who by order dated 20.7.2020 rejected the same and directed for further investigation. Court below thus concluded that only one charge sheet has been submitted in which aforesaid Sumit @ Amit has not been nominated as accused.
As per the mandate of provisions contained in Cr.P.C., a person who has not been nominated as an accused in the charge-sheet can be summoned as an accused by moving an application at appropriate stage.
Learned counsel for applicant in challenge to the order impugned in present application has vehemently urged that on the set of facts and circumstances, once the police has chargesheeted aforesaid Sumit @ Amit, action taken by the subsequent Investigating Officer, in excluding aforesaid person i.e. Sumit @ Amit from the charge sheet is manifestly illegal. He then contends that court below has erred in rejecting the application filed by applicant for summoning Sumit @ Amit as an accused.
However, learned counsel for applicant could not place any provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the basis of which non chargesheeted person can be summoned by the Court in the absence of proceedings under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
In view of above, Court below has rightly concluded that the issue with regard to the summoning of Sumit @ Amit as accused can be looked into at appropriate stage.
No interference is called for. Accordingly, the present application stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 7.1.2021 Anil K. Sharma