Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9638 of 2021 Applicant :- Abhinav Pratap Yadav @ Chandralok Yadav (Minor) Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Ram Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
1. Heard Sri Shiv Ram Dubey, leaned counsel for the applicant and Sri Janardan Prakash, learned AGA for the State.
2. This application has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved of the summoning order passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, District Sant Kabir Nagar seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No. 0024 of 2020 (State Vs. Abhinav Pratap Yadav @ Chandralok Yadav) under section 323, 504, 506 IPC at 3(1) (r) (s) SC/ST Act, police station - Khalilabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar instituted on the basis of charge sheet dated 5.3.2020 submitted in Case Crime No. 0080 of 2020.
3. Counsel for the applicant submits that this is a case of counter blast. Present applicant's father had lodged an FIR on 12.3.2020, Annexure-1, under the provisions of Section 354(A), 323, 504, 506 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, at police station - Khalilabad, district - Sant Kabir Nagar registering case crime no. 0152 of 2020.
4. Counsel for the applicant submits that incident had taken place on 4.2.2020 at about 16:00 hours but when FIR could not be registered, applicant's father had approached the Superintendent of Police, Sant Kabir Nagar on 6.2.2020 and on his request FIR was lodged on 12.3.2020.
5. It is submitted that as a counter blast, respondent Naresh lodged a report showing incident to had taken place on 5.2.2020 at about 17:00 hours under section 323, 504, 506, 3(1) (r) (s) at police station - Khalilabad, district Sant Kabir Nagar registering case crime no. 0080 of 2020.
6. Counsel for the applicant submits that out of the three named accused persons, two have been exonerated during investigation and charge sheet has been filed only against one accused, who being juvenile is tried before the Juvenile Justice Board, Sant Kabir Nagar. It is submitted that this is a case of counter blast and therefore, FIR, charge sheet and summoning order needs to be quashed.
7. Learned AGA in his turn submits that this is not a case of counter blast. FIR at the instance of father of the present applicant was recorded on 12.3.2020. He had initiated process of recording FIR on 6.2.2020 narrating the incident to have taken place on 4.2.2020; whereas case in which present applicant has been shown as accused, took place on 5.2.2020. FIR was lodged on the same date and, it appears that rather father of the present applicant initiated the proceedings for lodging of FIR on 6.2.2020 as a counter blast.
8. After hearing counsel for the parties and going through the available record, it is a matter of evidence, whether case against present applicant has been recorded as a counter blast or in absence to the case registered against the present applicant, his father had initiated proceedings to lodge a case against opposite party. At this stage there is very limited scope for interference in charge sheet or summoning order as certain facts can only be determined through evidence. Therefore, being conscious of the limits on the jurisdiction of this Court under section 482 Cr.P.C., I am of the opinion that in the present case, no case is made out for quashing of the charge sheet or summoning order. The application fails and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021 S.K.S.
Digitally signed by Justice Vivek Agarwal Date: 2021.07.30 18:25:43 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad