Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Gole @ Ramjan vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|04 June, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 40
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22291 of 2019 Applicant :- Gole @ Ramjan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 1.2.2011 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 740 of 2013 (State vs. Gole @ Ramjan) arising out of Case Crime No. 48 of 2011, under Sections 323, 324, 506 IPC, P.S. Kachhawa, District- Mirzapur, pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Mirzapur.
As per the allegations made in the first information report, it is alleged that on 24.1.2011 at about 7 p.m. applicant alongwith three others have assaulted the victim Ram Autar by lathi danda and knife, due to which Ram Autar suffered serious injuries. On the basis of said FIR, the police after investigation, has submitted charge-sheet, on which cognizance has been taken on 24.3.2011. The said cognizance order dated 24.3.2011 has been challenged after lapse of more than 8 years, however there is absolutely no explanation for the inordinate delay in challenging the said order.
On account of unexplained latches on the part of the applicant, no interference can be made at this stage. The present application u/s 482 is wholly misconceived and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 4.6.2019 KU
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Gole @ Ramjan vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
04 June, 2019
Judges
  • Rajiv Gupta
Advocates
  • Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava