Court No. - 1
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19945 of 2018 Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Soni Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kapil Kumar Pandey,Virendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 18.5.2018 passed by Addl. District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Lalitpur in F.R. No.62 of 2016 (Mahesh Prasad Vs. Ramesh Barar and others) in FIR Crime No.589 of 2012, u/s 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 120-B IPC and 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Kotwali, district Lalitpur.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the work which was allotted to the applicant to be done was actually done. After completion of work the District Magistrate constituted a three member Committee to submit report. Thereafter the said commitee submitted its report on 29.3.2012 as directed by the District Magistrate on the basis of which the District Magistrate passed an order dated 30.3.2012 directing the A.D.M. (Finance and Revenue) to lodge FIR against the accused persons. Thereafter in compliance of the order of District Magistrate, an FIR was lodged against the petitioner and after investigation the I.O. concerned has submitted final report on 31.7.2012 before the court concerned. Thereafter against the final report, the informant filed protest petition on which the applicant was summoned by the order of learned Special Judge vide order dated 18.5.2018, hence present petition has been filed before this Court.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the impugned order.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned order as well as the material brought on record, we are of the view that the impugned order does not suffer from any irregularity, illegality or jurisdictional error, hence no interference is required by this Court. The learned trial court after noticing that there was legally admissible evidence on record indicating the complicity of the applicant in the commission of the aforesaid offence, summoned the applicant to face trial. The prayer for quashing the impugned order is refused.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. Application lacks merit and is, accordingly dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 31.5.2018/Gaurav