Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 110780 (ALL)

CHANCHAL TIWARI v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

A482/42682/2024 · 2025-01-15

Samit Gopal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6137 Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42682 of 2024 Applicant :- Chanchal Tiwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwini Kumar,Gyan Prakash Tiwari,Kamlesh Tiwari,Nagesh Kumar Dwivedi,Shiva Kumar Lal,Sushil Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. Heard Sri Kamlesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant- Chanchal Tiwari, with the prayer to allow this application and quash the entire proceeding as well as impugned charge-sheet dated 10.08.2023 & cognizance/summoning order dated 04.12.2023 in Case No. 398 of 2023 (State Vs. Chanchal Tiwari) arising out of Case Crime No. 0162 of 2023, under Sections 279, 427 I.P.C., Police Station Mugra Badhshahpur, District Jaunpur, pending in the court of Gram Nayayalay, Machhalishahar, Jaunpur, with a further prayer that proceeding of the aforesaid case be stayed during the pendency of the present application. 3. The argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the bus in question being Bus No. UP70-ET 5639 was in the workshop and was not on route on the day of the incident. It is submitted that a certificate to the said effect has been given by the concerned Senior Centre in-charge of the depot regarding the same by stating that vehicle was having some problem and was in the workshop. It is submitted that as such the filing of charge-sheet and the taking of cognizance upon it is bad in the eyes of law and the proceedings deserve to be quashed. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that the said letter and the said fact is in the nature of defence of the applicant-accused which needs to be taken before the trial court at the appropriate stage but cannot be a ground for quashing of the proceedings at this stage. He has relied upon the judgement of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra : (2021) 19 SCC 401 to buttress his argument. It is submitted that the present case does not fall within the four corners of the said judgement. It is submitted that the applicant is an accused in the matter against whom charge-sheet has been submitted as he was the driver of the bus in question. It is submitted that the applicant although is not named in the first information report but the description of the accused in the matter is of the driver of the said bus in question. It is submitted that as such the present petition deserves to be dismissed. 5. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the driver of the bus in question is the accused. The applicant was subsequently identified and a charge-sheet has been submitted against him on which the court concerned has taken cognizance and summoned him. The fact whether the bus in question was in the workshop for repair is the defence of the applicant which has to be taken up at the appropriate stage in the trial. The evidence has to be led for it. The prosecution case levels allegations against the driver of the bus in question who was identified as the applicant. The same is thus not a fit case for quashing as per the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure (P) Ltd. (supra). 6. The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly, dismissed. 7. After this order was passed, learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant be permitted to appear before the trial court within a period of two weeks from today and file a regular bail application. 8. Learned counsel for the State has no objection of aforesaid arguments of learned counsel for the applicant. 9. It is directed that if the accused-applicant appears and applies for bail before the court concerned within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. Order Date :- 15.1.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad