STOCK MARKET UPDATE

Ticker

6/recent/ticker-posts

No Limitation applies to Sec.482 CrPC Petitions but inordinate delay unacceptable,

 Section 482 CrPC- Jurisdiction To Quash Can Be Exercised Only If No Offence  Is Made Out On Reading The Allegations In FIR As They Stand: Supreme Court

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has held that a party cannot approach the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C at his whim and caprice

In the given petition the petitioner challenged the FIR for the offences under under Section 5(1)(c)(d) read with 5(2) of the J&K Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120-B RPC.

Brief Facts of the Case 

The FIR contains two sets of allegations, one pertaining to amount spent on fuel and other pertaining to expenditure on maintenance of mechanical devices engaged for deweeding and dredging. After conducting the investigation, a separate charge sheet relating to allegation regarding expenditure on account of fuel, was filed before the Special Judge, Anticorruption, Kashmir, Srinagar, whereas another charge sheet came to be filed before the same Court in respect of the allegations relating to expenditure on account of maintenance of devices engaged for deweeding and dredging.

It has been contended in the petition that the petitioner is not involved in the alleged crime as the allegations made in the charge sheet against him are absolutely false.

 

The respondent has filed its status report in which, while narrating the allegations made in the charge sheet against the petitioner, it has been contended that the charge sheet against the petitioner has been laid before the Court and the charges against him have been framed. It has also been submitted that the trial of the case has substantially progressed and the statements of only two, out of 15 listed prosecution witnesses are to be recorded.

The charge sheet against the petitioner and the co-accused has appeared before the trial on 07.06.2005 and the charges against him have been framed on 16.02.2009. It also appears that the
petitioner has appeared before the trial court after the filing of the charge sheet on 11.02.2006. The petitioner has filed the present petition on 2nd March,2020. Thus, there is a delay of about 14 years
in filing the present petition. 

High Court’s Observation

 

The court noted that the petitioner has approached this court at a highly belated stage after about 14 years of receiving copy of the challan.

“The petitioner has actively participated in the proceedings before the trial court for all these years and has, after waking up from deep slumber, approached this Court, without any iota of explanation for the delay as per his choice, caprice and whim. Thus, it can by no stretch of imagination be stated that the petitioner has approached this Court within a reasonable time. The prosecution evidence is
almost complete and now late in the day, the petitioner wants this Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr. P. C, which, in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court would be
reluctant to do.”

The court dismissed the instant petition because of being highly belated

Social media is bold.


Social media is young.

Social media raises questions.

 Social media is not satisfied with an answer.

Social media looks at the big picture.

 Social media is interested in every detail.

social media is curious.

 Social media is free.

Social media is irreplaceable.

But never irrelevant.

Social media is you.

(With input from news agency language)

 If you like this story, share it with a friend!  


We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure

 

Post a Comment

0 Comments

Custom Real-Time Chart Widget

'; (function() { var dsq = document.createElement('script'); dsq.type = 'text/javascript'; dsq.async = true; dsq.src = '//' + disqus_shortname + '.disqus.com/embed.js'; (document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0] || document.getElementsByTagName('body')[0]).appendChild(dsq); })();

market stocks NSC