Allahabad High Court
Smt. Shakuntala Devi vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 15 March, 2021
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 89 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1311 of 2021 Applicant :- Smt. Shakuntala Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Mishra,Akanksha Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. F. Husain, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for State.
2. This application under section 482 Cr.PC has been filed challenging order dated 14.12.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C. Court No. 41 Kanpur Nagar in S. T. No. 199 of 2015 (State Vs. Smt. Shakuntala Devi) (S. T. No. 487 of 2019, S.T. No. 199A of 2015 and Crime No. 405/2014) under Sections 307, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C. P.S. Barra, Kanpur Nagar whereby application (Paper No. 28 Kha) filed by informant opposite party no.2 under Section 319 Cr.P.C. has been allowed, as well as entire proceedings of above mentioned sessions trials now pending in the Court of Additional Session Judge/F.T.C. Court No. 41 Kanpur Nagar.
3. At the very outset, learned A.G.A. contends that the court below in exercise of powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C., has passed the order dated 14.12.2018 which has been impugned in this application. Above order has been passed after two prosecution witnesses of fact namely P.W.1 and P.W.-5 had been examined. Their testimonies clearly implicate the applicant in crime in question. Procedure adopted by court below is in conformity with law laid down by Apex Court in Hardeep Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 3 SCC 92. It is thus urged that order impugned in present application is based upon evidence which has come in trial. It is next contended that present applicant has been filed after more than two years from the date of order dated 14.12.2018. As such, present application is hopelessly barred by laches. However, laches in filing present application has not been explained. Consequently, present application is liable to be dismissed on the ground of laches.
4. When confronted with aforesaid, learned counsel for applicants could not over come the same.
5. In view of above, no occasion arises before this court to entertain this application. The application fails and is liable to be dismissed.
6. It is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 15.3.2021 YK