SAJID Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed by the applicant Sajid with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet of case crime No. 88 of 2006 under sections 302, 307 and 120-B I.P.C. P.S. Bhawanpur district Meerut and also to quash the further proceedings arising out of the charge-sheet pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, vide criminal case No. 3502 of 2006.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are that the F.I.R. has been lodged by the ap plicant Sajid against Ikram, Abrar, Man-zoor and Babu on 29.5.2006 at 2.05 a.m. at P.S. Bhawanpur in respect of the incident which had allegedly occurred on 29.5.2006 at about 1.30 a.m., the distance of the police station was 4 km from the alleged place of occurrence, alleging therein that in the night of 28/29.5.2006, the first informant was sleeping on the roof of his house, his maternal uncle, the deceased Intizar, his injured brother Haroon alongwith the fam ily members were sleeping in their gher, at about 1.30 a.m. the accused Ikram and Abrar entered into gher, accused Manzoor and Babu remained at the gate of the gher, at the exhortation of the accused Babu, ac cused Ikram caused gun shot injury by 315 bore country made pistol on the person of the deceased Intizar, on hearing the sound of firing the injured left his cot and ran from there, the gun shot was discharged on him also by the accused Abrar at the exhortation of the accused Babu, the deceased Intizar died on the spot, the injured Haroon and the first informant went to the police station to lodge the F.I.R. According to the post-mortem examination report of the de ceased Intizar, he had sustained one gun shot wound of entry, having its exit wound and the injured Haroon had sustained multiple circular lacerated wounds caused by the firearm, after investigation it was found by the I.O. that the named accused Ikram, Babu, Abrar and Manzoor were falsely implicated, the offence was commit ted by the applicant, co-accused Haroon and Safayat and submitted the charge-sheet against them, the report for initiating the proceedings under section 182 I.P.C. were also submitted by the I.O. against the applicant Sajid because he had lodged the false F.I.R.

(3.) IN reply to the above contention it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Babu, who subsequently charge-sheeted that in the present case, charge-sheet has been submitted by the local police against the applicant on which the learned C.J.M. Meerut has taken cognizance on 5.9.2006, once the cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate concerned and he has summoned the applicant to face the trial, thereafter the investigation was handed over to C.B.C.I.D. in which the applicant has not been charge-sheeted but different set of persons who were named in the F.I.R. have been charge-sheeted, have also been summoned by the learned Magistrate to face the trial, in such a situation the order of cognizance taken by the learned Magis trate concerned against the applicant can not be quashed on the basis of subsequent charge-sheet filed by the C.B.C.I.D., the present application is devoid of merit and the same may be dismissed.