In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has dismissed applications seeking to quash a charge sheet related to the demolition of a house in Azamgarh. The judgment, delivered by Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, addresses the legal intricacies surrounding the case and underscores the court’s stance on the sufficiency of evidence in criminal proceedings.
Background of the Case
The case revolves around an incident that occurred on December 23, 2016, when complainant Badri Prasad Gupta alleged that a group of individuals, including the applicants, formed an unlawful assembly and demolished his house using a JCB machine. The First Information Report (FIR) was lodged against eight named accused, including the applicants Tanmay Pandey, Rajesh Kumar Maurya, and Shailesh Upadhyay. The charge sheet was filed on August 14, 2017, against five of the accused, while the involvement of two others was found to be false during the investigation.
Legal Issues Involved
The primary legal issues in the case were:
1. Validity of Affidavits: The court noted discrepancies in the affidavits submitted by the applicants, particularly the lack of proper declarations and the absence of supporting documents.
2. False Implication: The applicants argued that they were falsely implicated due to ongoing civil disputes in the Revenue Court, Azamgarh.
3. Sufficiency of Evidence: Whether the evidence collected during the investigation was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the applicants.
Court’s Decision
The court meticulously analyzed the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. Key observations and decisions include:
– Affidavit Discrepancies: The court highlighted the legal errors in the affidavits submitted by the applicants, noting the lack of proper declarations and supporting documents. Despite these errors, the court chose to proceed on the merits of the case due to the prolonged pendency of the applications.
– False Implication Argument: The court rejected the applicants’ argument of false implication, stating, “There is no valid reason for their false implication, therefore, argument of false implication is hereby rejected.”
– Sufficiency of Evidence: The court found that the evidence collected during the investigation, including statements from the complainant and witnesses, established a prima facie case against the applicants. The court observed, “Presence of applicants and other accused are prima facie established.”
– CCTV Footage and Investigation Lapses: While acknowledging the absence of CCTV footage and certain investigation lapses, the court held that these were not sufficient to dismiss the occurrence of the incident or the involvement of the applicants.
Important Observations
The court emphasized the importance of a fair trial and the need to avoid premature interference in criminal proceedings. Justice Shamshery noted, “At this stage, to cause interference with a legally initiated criminal proceeding would amount to cause it a sudden death as well as at this stage, the Court cannot conduct a mini trial.”
Conclusion
The applications to quash the charge sheet were dismissed, and the interim orders were vacated. The court directed the trial court to proceed with the case, emphasizing the need for a thorough judicial process. The case, titled State vs. Rajesh Kumar Maurya and others (Case No. 843 of 2019), will continue in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh.
Counsel Details
– For Applicants: Rahul Mishra and Chandra Kumar Rai
– For Opposite Party: G.A. and Himanshu Shekhar
