Court No. - 1
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6747 of 2018 Applicant :- Amit Kumar Shukla And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nirvikar Gupta,Varun Kumar Agnihotri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Nirvikar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri I.P.Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 22.12.2017 as well as order dated 27.8.2016 passed by Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Room No. 12, Allahabad in S.T. No. 530/15; State Vs. Amit Kumar Shukla & Ors. (connected Case Crime No. 190/2015, u/s 364/387 IPC), and the entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 296 of 2015, u/s 2/3 U.P.Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986, P.S. Kydganj, District Allahabad.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that earlier discharge application of the applicants was rejected. Subsequently, some facts came to the knowledge of the applicants then again they moved the discharge application, however, the trial court has rejected the same on the ground that earlier a discharge application of the applicants has been rejected. He relied upon various case laws in support of his arguments i.e. Ram Lal Narang; Om Prakash Narang and Another Vs. State (Delhi Administration) 1979 AIR(SC) 1791, State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. A S Peter 2008 AIR (SCW) 637, Raghubans Prasad Vs. State (Prabhu Dayal Missir) 1961 CrLJ 528, Surendra Singh Vs. State of U.P. 1954 AIR(SC) 194, Bhagwan Samardha Sreepada Vallabha Venkata Vishwandadha Maharaj Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 1999 AIR(SC) 2332.
Learned AGA opposed the aforesaid prayer and submitted that the charges have been framed against the applicants and the trial is in progress. The case laws which have been relied upon by learned counsel for the applicants is distinguishable from the facts and circumstances of the present case.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned order as well as the material brought on record, I am of the view that the impugned order is based upon relevant considerations and supported by cogent reasons, hence requires no interference by this Court in its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The application lacks merits and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.3.2018 A.K.Srivastava