Allahabad High Court
Sunil Kumar Maurya vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 17 September, 2024
Author: Raj Beer Singh
Bench: Raj Beer Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:150808 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27983 of 2024 Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Maurya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Chaubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. This application under section - 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the order dated 24.07.2024, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia in Case No. 1136 of 2013 (State vs. Sunil Kumar Maurya), arising out of Case Crime No. 130 of 2012, under Sections - 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section - 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Sikanderpur, District ? Ballia, whereby the application filed by applicant under Section ? 340 Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is husband of informant and he is facing trial in the aforesaid case. During pendency of the trial, the applicant has moved an application under Section - 340 Cr.P.C. on 22.05.2023 but that application has not been decided so far. Applicant has moved an application before the trial court for stay of proceedings of aforesaid case till the disposal of application of the applicant filed under Section - 340 Cr.P.C. but the said application has been rejected by the trial court vide order dated 24.07.2024. It was submitted that the application under Section - 340 Cr.P.C. must be decided during pendency of the trial and thus, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order.
5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.
6. Perusal of record shows that applicant is one of the accused in the aforesaid case and he is facing trial for offences under Section - 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C.. It appears that applicant has moved an application under Section - 340 Cr.P.C., which was registered as Misc. Application No. 248 of 2023. While the main case was pending for final hearing the applicant has moved an application stating that till the disposal of said application under Section - 340 Cr.P.C., the proceedings of aforesaid main case no.1136 of 2013 be stayed. That application was rejected by the trial court vide impugned order dated 24.07.2024. Sub-section (1) of Section 340 Cr.P.C. contemplates holding of a preliminary inquiry. It is settled position of law that an application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. has to be dealt with normally at the time of final disposal of the matter. Thus, there was no just basis to stay the proceedings of the main case no.1136 of 2013. However, the application under Section - 340 Cr.P.C. must be decided along with disposal of the main case no.1136 of 2013.
7. In view of aforesaid, the trial court is directed that the application of applicant under Section - 340 Cr.P.C. shall be decided along with main case no.1136 of 2013 and thus, the main case as well as the application under Section - 340 Cr.P.C. shall be decided together.
8. The application u/s - 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of in above terms.
Order Date :- 17.9.2024 S Rawat