Court No. - 1
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21093 of 2007 Applicant :- Brijesh Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Gupta,Dileep Kumar,Narendra Singh,Rajrshi Gupta,Santosh Shukla,V.P. Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,R.C. Upadhyay with Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20894 of 2007 Applicant :- Dinesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Gupta,Dileep Kumar,Narendra Singh,Rajrshi Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri V.P. Singh Thakrey, Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Santosh Shukla, Sri Dileep Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rishabh Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Jai Narain, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have prayed for quashing the order dated 16.8.2007 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge, C.B.I, Prevention of Corruption Act, Ghaziabad in S.T. No.439 of 2007 State Vs. Surendra Koli and others allowing the application of opposite party no.2 u/s 319 Cr.P.C.
Since both the aforesaid 482 Cr.P.C. Applications arise out of a common judgment and order, hence, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, both the 482 Cr.P.C. Applications are being decided by a common order.
The pleadings between the parties have already been exchanged.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicant Dinesh Yadav is the Investigating Officer of the present case which was registered u/s 302, 366, 376, 201 IPC commonly known as 'Nithari Kand'. The applicant Brijesh Pratap Singh, the then S.O of the concerned police station was the assisting officer of the then I.O. of the case Dinesh Yadav. It is stated that the trial of the present case is going on against the accused persons who are charge sheeted during the course of trial. The opposite party no.2 who was cross-examined as P.W.5 Nand Lal has deposed that he has seen the accused Dinesh Yadav, the then I.O accepting the two notes of Rs.500/- each from one Mr. Sharma, Manager of the accused Pandher. The applicants have been summoned on the basis of examination-in-chief by the trial court for the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act but there appears to be no Section mentioned in the impugned order disclosing the offence which has been committed. The said person has also not supported the said allegation in his cross-examination and has denied the same. Hence the impugned order is liable to be quashed.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 could not dispute the the argument of learned counsel for the applicant and he admits the fact that in the cross-examination, the said allegation has been denied by the O.P. No.2.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, there appears to be no legal evidence against the applicants which warrant their trial, hence the impugned order is liable to be set-aside.
Hence, in view of the above, the impugned order dated 16.8.2007 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge, C.B.I, Prevention of Corruption Act in S.T. No.439 of 2007 is hereby quashed.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application stands allowed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 31.10.2018 Gaurav