RAM BAHADUR SAXENA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent. The present application has been filed for quashing of the proceeding of Sessions Trial No. 165 of 2010 arising out of Case Crime No. 3638 of 2005, under sections 217, 218, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B Indian Penal Code and 13(2) read with Sec. 13(1)(D) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, police station Civil Lines, district Moradabad pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Moradabad. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the first information report was lodged after 16 years of the alleged offence and the charge sheet has been filed after 21 years.

(2.) It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that in view of the well settled law as laid down by the Apex Court in the matter of A.R. Antuley Vs. R.S. Nayak and others, JT 1991 (6) SC 431 as well as the jugdment of this Court reported in the matter of Akhtar Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2005 (52) ACC 658 (SC) , the same cannot be sustained in law.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant further states that there is no concealment on the part of the applicant as it is evident from annexure-2, and therefore, no offence under the charged sections is made out against the applicant.