Court No. - 85
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14081 of 2021 Applicant :- Amit Kumar Mishra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijendra Kumar Mishra,Santosh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 8.3.2021 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (Essential Commodity Act), Court no. 4, Deoria in S.T. No. 179 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime NO. 489 of 2015, under sections 498-A, 313 IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Khukhundu, District Deoria.
From the perusal of the record it appears that due to some differences between the parties an FIR has been filed in case crime no. 689 of 2015, unders ection 498-A, 313 IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Khukhundu, District Deoria on 17.09.2015. On which the statement of the complainant was recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. During investigation, the statement of the victim Smt. Nitu Mishra was recorded on 19.09.2015 under section 161 Cr.P.C. in which the victim has also supported the prosecution story. After investigation, the I.O. has submitted the charge sheet against four persons. After submission of charge sheet, the applicant filed an application under section 482 Cr.P.C. on 24.5.2018, on which the order for discharge has been passed and further directed to apply for bail before the court below. In pursuance thereof the applicant filed discharge application before the court below, but the same was rejected by the court below.
Learned A.G.A. has drawn the attention of the court to the order passed by Hon. Supreme Court in Criminal appeal No. 709 of 2021 State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kunwar Singh, paragraph No.8 which is quoted below:
Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and the respondent, we are of the view that the High Court has transgressed the limits of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC by enquiring into the merits of the allegations at the present stage. The fact that the respondent was a signatory to the cheques is not in dispute. This, in fact, has been adverted to in the judgment of the High Court. The High Court has also noted that a person who is required to approve a financial proposal is duty bound to observe due care and responsibility. There are specific allegations in regard to the irregularities which have been committed in the course of the work of the ‘Janani Mobility Express’ under the National Rural Health Mission. At this stage, the High Court ought not to be scrutinizing the material in the manner in which the trial court would do in the course of the criminal trial after evidence is adduced. In doing so, the High Court has exceeded the well-settled limits on the exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC. A detailed enquiry into, the merits of the allegations was not warranted. The FIR is not expected to be an encyclopedia, particularly, in a matter involving financial irregularities in the course of the administration of a public scheme. A final report has been submitted under Section 173 of CrPC, after investigation.
Considering the facts, submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, from the perusal of the record and the case law cited by learned A.G.A. it appears that learned court below has rightly rejected the discharged application filed by the applicant. There is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
Accordingly, the application lacks merit is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 13.8.2021 RPD