Gaya Prasad vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Dayal Khare, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State Respondent.

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed for quashing of the charge-sheet filed in Case Crime No. 4445/2008, under Sections 323, 325, 304 I.P.C. and also for quashing of the second charge-sheet in Case Crime No. 143/2007, under Sections 323, 325 I.P.C. pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ist, Pilibhit.

It is contended by learned Counsel for the applicant that for the same incident two charge-sheets have been filed against the applicant which is bad in law.

Learned Counsel for the applicant has a remedy open to him by filing an application as per the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code for redressal of his grievances.

Accordingly, the present 482 Cr.P.C. application is disposed off with a direction that in case the applicant files an application before the appropriate court as per the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code, the same shall be considered by the court below as expeditiously, as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.

Learned Counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has already been enlarged on bail under Sections 323/325 I.P.C. and that he shall file an application for bail u/s 304 I.P.C. which has been subsequently added.

If such an application is filed, the same shall be considered and decided by the concerned court below as expeditiously, as possible in accordance with law in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and Anr. v. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as Judgment passed by Hon''ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off.