Court No. - 72
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16824 of 2019 Applicant :- Smt. Pushpa Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Somdev Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present application has been filed to quash the order dated 13.03.2019 passed by VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Agra in Application u/s 193 Cr.P.C. in S.T. No. 591 of 2017 (State Vs. Dinesh & Ors.), under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., arising out of Case Crime No. 0282 of 2017, P.S. Atmaddaula, District Agra.
3. Undisputedly, upon investigation, the police had submitted a charge- sheet against one of the four persons accused in the FIR. Thus, charge- sheet was submitted against Dinesh. It also appears that the investigation against the other three accused persons remained pending. The charge- sheet against Dinesh resulted in the proceedings in Session Trial No. 591 of 2017, which proceedings had to be terminated on the death of Dinesh.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, in the further investigation, Parcha No. 6 was prepared by the Investigating Officer on 28.10.2017 suggesting that he had no material to proceed against other three accused. However, it is yet not clear whether any final report was submitted or if it was submitted, the fate of it is not known.
5. In such circumstances, the applicant appears to have filed an application in Session Trial No. 591 of 2017 (State Vs. Dinesh) to summon the other three persons. The said prayer has been rejected by the learned court below observing that there is no evidence before it to summon any other person and that the trial was confined to the deceased Dinesh.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits, the said Dinesh was suffering from paralysis and, therefore, he was incapable for committing the offence of strangulating two children. Therfore, the learned court below has erred in not summoning the other three persons who are the main perpetrators of the crime.
7. Shri Ankit Srivastava, learned AGA for the State, on the other hand, opposed the present application. He submits, neither any statement was recorded in the Session Trial as may have allowed the learned court below to exercise powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C. nor any final report was submitted against the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 along with the charge-sheet that resulted in the Session Trial No. 591 of 2017. Therefore, the learned court below has not erred in rejecting the application.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, in view of the facts noted above, the only course that remains open to the applicant is to pursue the matter in the further investigation and if that investigation is completed and the final report submitted, it shall remain open to the applicant to file a protest application and to proceed against the opposite party nos. 2 to 4.
9. However, in view of the admitted position that there is no final report against opposite party nos. 2 to 4 and further there is no statement recorded before the trial court making any accusation against the opposite party nos. 2 to 4, the order impugned does not suffer from any infirmity.
10. In view of the above, the present application is dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.4.2019 Prakhar