(Order on C.M.A. No. 73558 of 2020- Application for amendment)
1. Heard Sri Jitendra Prakash Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Srish Chandra Agnihotri, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for C.B.I. and perused the material available on record.
2. An application for amendment has been filed for making an amendment in the array of parties.
3. In view of the facts stated in the application, the amendment application is allowed.
4. Learned counsel for applicant is permitted to make necessary amendment in the memo of petition forthwith.
(Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Ravi/ Court No. - 29 Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 1697 of 2020 Applicant :- Shashi Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through S.P.C.B.I./A.C.B., Lucknow & Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- Srish Chandra Aghinotri Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.S.G.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Jitendra Prakash Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Srish Chandra Agnihotri, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for C.B.I. and perused the material available on record.
2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing the charge sheet No. 01/2019 dated 20.12.2019 filed in R.C. No. 0062017A0018, U/S 120B r/w 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A I.P.C. and section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act, 1988 P.S. - C.B.I./A.C.B., Lucknow and Summoning order dated 03.01.2020 passed by Spl. Judge Anti Corruption C.B.I. (Central) Lucknow in CC No. 24/2020 R.C. No. 0062017A0018, U/S 120B r/w 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A I.P.C. and section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act, 1988 P.S. - C.B.I./A.C.B., Lucknow (State through c.B.I. Vs. Mahendra Kumar Pandey & ors.).
3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant was joint-applicant for a loan application with UCO Bank and subsequently it was discovered that the ITR filed by the co-applicant i.e. husband of the applicant was forged and numerous such cases were also discovered in the said Branch and therefore criminal proceedings have been initiated against the applicant.
4. After arguing the matter up to some length, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicant may be permitted to move discharge application through counsel and suitable directions may be issued for expeditious disposal of the same.
5. Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.
6. In view of above, it is provided that applicant permitted to move his discharge application(s) through counsel within four weeks' from today and in case any such application(s) is/are being filed, same shall be heard and decided expeditiously after hearing the parties, in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned and speaking order.
7. Till the aforesaid period of four weeks' and during pendency of discharge application, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.
8. In case of failure on the part of applicant in moving the discharge application(s) within the aforesaid period, she/they will not be entitled to the benefit of this order.
9. With above directions this application stands disposed of.
(Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Ravi/