MOHD. HASNAIN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO.
A482/3161/2025 · 2025-04-16
Saral Srivastava
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 133160 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 133160 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21475 Court No. - 19 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3161 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Hasnain Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Farooq Ayoob,Mansi Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. The applicant by means of present application has assailed the order dated 03.09.2024 passed by Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.08, Barabanki in S.S.T. No.350/2024 (State Vs. Mohd. Hasnain and others) arising out of Case Crime No.478/2023 under Section 8/21/29/60(2) of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki whereby the application (B-22) of the applicant has been rejected. The applicant had filed an application for summoning the call details of mobile number 9161978406 and CCTV footage etc. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the application of the applicant has been rejected in cursory manner inasmuch as the trial is at the stage of recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. It is submitted that in almost similar circumstances this Court in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.891 of 2024 has set aside the order and remanded the matter to the concerned Court to decide the application afresh. Accordingly, it is submitted that the impugned order be set aside and the matter may be remitted to the concerned court. 4. Per-contra, learned AGA would contend that the present application is premature and therefore, this Court may not interfere with the impugned order. 5. Be that as it may, paragraph 5 to 8 of the judgment passed in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.891 of 2024 are relevant and the same are reproduced herein below:
"5. The evidences sought to be summoned namely the CCTV footage of cameras installed at public places from Lucknow to Barabanki, the mobile location and call detail records of the applicant and certain police persons can by no means be produced by the applicant, more particularly when the applicant is languishing in custody. 6. It appears that the application has been rejected in a cursory manner, without taking into consideration the aforesaid facts. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the impugned order dated 22.12.2023 passed by the learned Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.10, Barabanki in Session Trial No. 1160 of 2023 (State Vs.
Saheem) is hereby quashed. 8. The trial court is directed to decide the aforesaid application filed by the applicant afresh keeping in view the observations made in this order."
6. Impugned order reveals that it has been passed in a cursory manner without recording any reason and without appreciating the correct position of law. Relevant extract of the impugned
order is reproduced herein below:
"उभयपक्ष कके वविदद्वान अधधिविकद्वाओओं कको ससुनद्वा एविओं पतद्वाविलली कद्वा पररिशलीलन वकयद्वा। पतद्वाविलली कके पररिशलीलन सके स्पष्ट हकोतद्वा हहै वक पतद्वाविलली अभली अवभयकोजन सद्वाक्ष्य हकेतसु वनयत हहै तथद्वा पली०डब्ल्यय०-01 कद्वा बयद्वान अवभधलधखित वकयद्वा जद्वा चसुकद्वा हहै। उक पद्वाथरनद्वापत कके मद्वाध्यम सके बचद्वाविपक्ष दद्वारिद्वा अपनके पक्ष मम न्यद्वायद्वालय कके मद्वाध्यम सके सद्वाक्ष्य सओंकधलत करिनके कद्वा पयद्वास वकयद्वा जद्वा रिहद्वा हहै। जबवक वविधधि कद्वा यह ससुस्थद्वावपत धसदद्वाओंत हहै वक अवभयकोजन दद्वारिद्वा अपनके सद्वाक्ष्य समद्वाप्त करिनके कके पश्चद्वात अवभयसुक कको अपनली पवतरिक्षद्वा मम सद्वाक्ष्य पस्तसुत करिनके कद्वा अविसरि पदद्वान वकयद्वा जद्वा सकतद्वा हहै। चयओंवक अभली पतद्वाविलली अवभयकोजन सद्वाक्ष्य हकेतसु वनयत हहै। अततः इस स्तरि परि उक पद्वाथरनद्वापत स्विलीकद्वारि वकए जद्वानके कद्वा ककोई औवचत्त पतलीत नहहीं हकोतद्वा हहै। "
7. In view of the above, impugned order dated 03.09.2024 passed by Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.08, Barabanki in S.S.T. No.350/2024 (State Vs. Mohd. Hasnain and others) arising out of Case Crime No.478/2023 under Section 8/21/29/60(2) of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki is quashed and the matter is remitted to the court concerned to decide the matter afresh keeping in view the observation made above.
8. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.
Order Date :- 16.4.2025 Mohit Digitally signed by :- MOHIT KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench