Rama Kant Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Mani Chauhan, J.—Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. as well as perused the documents available on record.

This petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Code) has been filed by the petitioner-complainant with following prayer:

to quash the orders dated 30.08.2010 passed by the revisional court and 31.08.2010 passed by the learned C.J.M., Faizabad in case No. 5312 of 2010 initiated from case crime No. 715 of 2006, under Sections 307, 504, 506, Police Station Kotwali Ayodhya, District Faizabad.

The submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that on the written report of complainant (present applicant), the police of police station Kotwali Ayodhya, District Faizabad registered a case under Sections 307, 504, 506 I.P.C. against the accused for investigation. The Investigating Officer had submitted charge sheet against co-accused Pramod Singh. The case was committed to the court of Sessions which is pending for disposal. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer filed supplementary charge sheet against the accused Vikas Singh as absconder. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faizabad after taking cognizance of the offence issued non-bailable warrant against the accused and process under Sections 82 & 83 of the Code. Accused had not appeared before the court concerned but he moved application before the court through his counsel as the allegation that he had filed a Crl. Misc. Case No. 1194 of 2009 before the High Court and as the same is pending for disposal. Therefore, the criminal proceedings initiated against him should be stayed. On the basis of application of the accused, learned A.C.J.M. recalled the orders of non-bailable warrant and process under Sections 82 & 83 of the Code passed against the accused and ordered for listing the case on the date already fixed. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed revision against the order passed by the learned A.C.J.M. before the Additional Sessions Judge, Faizabad which was dismissed by him vide order dated 30.08.2010. However, the learned Additional Sessions Judge had ordered that the accused will appear before the court concerned on 20.09.2010. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petition filed by the accused has already been dismissed by this Court on 25.08.2010 and there is no stay order. The trial court is not taking any step to procure the attendance of the accused and the accused who is giving threatening to the complainant, therefore, trial court be directed to proceed with the case strictly in accordance with the provision of law.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the petition.

Considered the submissions of learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A.

From a perusal of the record, it appears that the revisional court has already fixed 20.09.2010 for appearance of the accused before the trial court. Keeping in view of this fact, this petition is being disposed of finally with the observation that the trial court will proceed against the accused strictly in accordance with the provision of law.