Allahabad: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad has issued the following order:
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Court No. - 25
Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 3863 of 2015
Applicant :- Umesh Yadav
Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P And Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Aditya Nath Mittal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA and perused the record.�
This petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet No.129 of 2014 dated 23.9.2014 filed in case crime no. 04 of 2012 under sections 363, 366, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, Amethi, District Amethi as well as the summoning order dated 24.07.2015.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the victim wants to reside with the petitioner and on 12.11.2012, she had moved the affidavit before the court below that she has not been kidnapped but she has resided with her Mausi and Umesh Yadav has been falsely implicated. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is ready to surrender before the court below and some protection may be granted to him.
Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the petition.
The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not to be exercised in a routine manner, but it is for limited purposes, namely, to give effect to any order under the Code, or to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice. Time and again, Apex Court and various High Courts, including ours one, have reminded when exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. would be justified, which cannot be placed in straight jacket formula, but one thing is very clear that it should not preampt a trial and cannot be used in a routine manner so as to cut short the entire process of trial before the Courts below. If from a bare perusal of first information report or complaint, it is evident that it does not disclose any offence at all or it is frivolous, collusive or oppressive from the face of it, the Court may exercise its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. but it should be exercised sparingly. This will not include as to whether prosecution is likely to establish its case or not, whether the evidence in question is reliable or not or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it, accusation would not be sustained, or the other circumstances, which would not justify exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. I need not...