Contention Of Accused About False Implication Cannot Be Examined In Section 482 CrPC Proceedings: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has observed that while deciding the application under Section 482 CrPC, the High Court cannot examine the contention of the accused that he/she has been falsely implicated in the case. “While exercising the powers under Section 482 of the CrPC, the Court has very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider 'whether any sufficient material available...
The Allahabad High Court has observed that while deciding the application under Section 482 CrPC, the High Court cannot examine the contention of the accused that he/she has been falsely implicated in the case.
“While exercising the powers under Section 482 of the CrPC, the Court has very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider 'whether any sufficient material available to proceed further against the accused for which the accused is required to be tried or not,” a bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi noted.
The observation was made while dismissing an application filed by two accused persons under Section 482 CrPC challenging an order passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Sitapur taking cognizance of offences under Sections 302 & 120-B IPC and Section 3 (2) 5 SC/ST Act against the applicants, even though their names were not included in the charge sheet filed in connection with the murder of a girl
The trial court passed this order on the ground that the other girl who was accompanying the deceased at the time of the incident had implicated the applicants in her statement recorded by the Investigating Officer under 161 CrPC, as also in her statement recorded by the Magistrate under Section 164 CrPC and the Investigating Officer had ignored the aforesaid material evidence.
While passing the impugned order, the trial court placed reliance on the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Nahar Singh vs State of Uttar Pradesh 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 291 wherein it was observed that the Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence based on a police report in terms of Section 190 (1)(b) of the CrPC can issue summons to any person not arraigned as an accused in the police report or in the FIR.
Taking note of the Apex Court's rulings in the cases of Nahar Singh (supra) and Central Bureau of Investigation vs Aryan Singh 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 292 wherein it was held that a High Court cannot conduct a "mini trial" while exercising powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Further, relying upon the recent ruling of the Top Court in Manik B Vs. Kadapala Sreyes Reddy and others 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 642 to note thus:
“…while deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., this Court cannot examine the contention of the learned Counsel for the applicant that the entire family of the applicant has been implicated falsely and that will be decided by the trial Court after the parties have availed the opportunity to lead their respective evidence.”
Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, finding no merit in the application, the same was accordingly dismissed
Appearances
Counsel for Applicant: Anil Kumar Awasthi
Counsel for Opposite Party: GA, Ankit Tripathi, Bhupendra Singh Bisht
Case title – Mohit Kumar And Another vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 27 [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10364 of 2023]
Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 27