Court No. - 67
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 940 of 2019 Applicant :- Arun Kumar Shukla And 3 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Uday Bhan Mishra,Devendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Short counter affidavit and vakalatnama filed by Rajnish Prashad Tripathi, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Rajnish Prashad Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 15.06.2016 relating to SST No. 15 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No. 201 of 2016 under Sections 363, 366 and Section 8 POCSO Act, cognizance order dated 16.08.2018, Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Banda pending in the Court of 1st, Additional Sessions Judge, Banda.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the FIR was registered under Section 363 and 366 IPC and Section 8 POCSO Act against applicants with the allegation that the informant's daughter was allegedly kidnapped by Pawan Shukla. The police has submitted charge sheet against them during investigation. It is come out that Pawan Shukla applicant no.2 got married with daughter of opposite party no.2 and now they are residing as husband and wife.
Sri Rajnish Prasad Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 in his short counter affidavit stated that parties has come to terms. The applicant no.2 and the daughter of opposite party no. 2 are living happily as married couple. A joint affidavit has also been filed by both the contesting parties. Learned counsel has relied upon the latest judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Suhani and another v. State of U.P. and others decided on 26th April, 2018 passed in Civil Appeal No. 4532 of 2018 (arising out of SLP (C) No. 8001 of 2018) and Sachin Pawar & Anr vs State Of U.P.& Ors.
Notice on behalf of opposite party no.1 has been accepted by learned A.G.A, who prays for and is allowed six weeks time to file counter affidavit.
Issue notice to opposite party no.2, who may also file counter affidavit within the same period.
Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.
List after expiry of the aforesaid period.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in Case Crime No. 201 of 2016 under Sections 363, 366 and Section 8 POCSO Act, cognizance order dated 16.08.2018, Police Station-
Kotwali Nagar, District-Banda pending in the Court of 1st, Additional Sessions Judge, Banda with the condition as law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. and other Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation decided on 28.03.2018, which reads as under :-
"Situation of proceedings remaining pending for long on account of stay needs to be remedied. Remedy was required not only for corruption cases but for all civil and criminal cases where on account of stay, civil and criminal proceedings were held up. At times, proceedings were adjourned sine die on account of stay. Even after stay was vacated, intimation was not received and proceedings were not taken up. It was directed that in all pending cases where stay against proceedings of civil or criminal trial was operating, the same would come to end on expiry of six months from today unless in exceptional case by speaking order such stay was extended. In cases where stay was granted in future, same would end on expiry of six months from date of such order unless similar extension was granted by speaking order."
It is made clear that in the event if the pleadings are not exchanged because of any non cooperation of any of the contesting parties in not filing their counter version, the court would be free to pass a suitable order at the end of above mentioned upper limit of six months.
Order Date :- 25.1.2019 Abhishek Sri.