Court No. - 54
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28891 of 2018 Applicant :- Shivshankar Chaubey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Bhushan Kunwar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. The present 482 Cr.P.C. Petition has been filed for quashing the order/notice dated 03.04.2018 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Ballia as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 45 of 2018 (State v. Shivshankar Chaubey), under Section 110/117 Cr.P.C.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the impugned notice dated 03.04.2018 do not contain the substance of allegation which has been made against the applicant and has been issued in a routine manner on a printed format, wherein it has been simply mentioned that the applicant is habitual offender and causes harassment to the general public. The witnesses from the public refrain themselves from deposing against him on account of fear. In the circumstances, he should not be allowed to roam freely and mix with the general public. Copy of the aforesaid notice has been annexed as annexure 2 to the instant petition. On this forte learned counsel for the applicant argued that as the aforesaid notice does not fulfil the requirements of mandatory provisions of section 111 Cr.P.C., therefore, the same is null and void and the proceedings before the learned Magistrate concerned are a nullity, wherein only blanks have filled up and the substances of the information received as set forth, is wholly incomplete, vague and ambiguous and such the Magistrate concerned has no jurisdiction or authority to proceed on the basis of the notice impugned. Therefore, it is further contended that the notice impugned is illegal and is liable to be set aside.To buttress his submission, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the principles laid down in the cases of Shiv Kant Tripathi S/o Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. decided coordinate Bench of this Court on 19.09.2015 in Criminal Misc. Application No. 13309 of 2005 and Nafisul Hasan Naqvi v. State of U.P. and others [(2011) 3 ACR 3026].
In reply to the above contentions, learned A.G.A., submitted that there is no illegality in issuing the notice.
From the perusal of the impugned notice, it appears that the substance of allegations made against the applicant has not been mentioned. Therefore, admittedly it is a vague notice, hence, hereby quashed.
With the aforesaid direction, the instant application is allowed.
However, it shall be open to the learned Magistrate concerned to issue fresh notice, if he chooses.
Order Date :- 6.9.2018 shailesh