Court No. - 72
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19307 of 2017
Applicant :- Ambika Prasad
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivasta,Ajay Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Singh
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Shri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Ajay Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and; learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 01.05.2017 as well as proceedings of Complaint Case No. 357 / 2015 (Shiv Prasanna Vs. Ambika), u/s 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act and Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S.
Shohratgarh, Distt. Siddharth Nagar, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Siddharth Nagar.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, in view of the Section 11 of the Essential Commodies Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), as amended in the State of Uttar Pradesh by U.P. Act no. 9 of 1974, learned court below could not have taken cognizance of the offence punishable under the Act.
4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submits, besides the allegation of the offence under the Act, the complainant was the Gram Pradhan and had made allegations of offence committed under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC with respect to his signatures that were claimed to have been forged on certain government records whereupon food stocks were released in favour of the applicant. He would submit that with respect to those offences, there were no requirement of prior sanction.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, since single transaction is alleged to have given rise to the offence both under the Special Act and the Indian Penal Code. Thus, at present, the prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is declined.
6. However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
7. For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.
8. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally
disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Prakhar