Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 104286 (ALL)

PUNEET YADAV AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

A482/35122/2024 · 2025-04-08

Deepak Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:51245 Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35122 of 2024 Applicant :- Puneet Yadav And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shabana Nizam,Zia Uddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard Ms. Shabana Nizam, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to allow the present application and direct the court of Additional Session Judge/POCSO Ist, Jaunpur to separate the trial of the applicant from S.S.T. No. 106 of 2020 (State Vs. Hariom Yadav) arising out of Case Crime no. 659 of 2019 under section 147, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427, 325 I.P.C. Police Station-Kotwali, District-Jaunpur and further be pleased to direct to conduct the trial separately under section 147, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427, 325 IPC before appropriate court in accordance with law. 3. Counsel for the applicants submits charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant and other co-accused. Some of the co-accused have been found guilty under the POCSO Act. Applicant's case is different from co-accused and since no evidence found under the POCSO Act against the applicant, therefore, his trial proceedings be separated from other co-accused. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the submission raised by applicants' counsel and submitted that some co-accused have been found guilty under the POCSO Act and since trial proceedings is going on, hence, applicant's case cannot be separated. 5. In view of the above, prima facie, case is made out against the applicants and trial shall commenced/continue with the court where co-accused offence under the POCSO is being examined. During course of argument, applicant's counsel could not explain that why should the trial proceedings of applicants be separated from other co-accused, hence, no interference is warranted, at this stage. 6. The present 482 application of applicants, Puneet Yadav, Sagan Yadav, Lulu Yadav and Bhola Yadav, are hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observations. Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad