Partly allowed

Jai Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2018A482/11393/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court applied Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to review a prayer to quash a charge sheet and cognizance order. Holding that factual disputes require trial, the prayer to quash was refused. However, if the applicant surrenders within 45 days and applies for bail, the court will consider the bail request in light of specific precedents.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash dismissed. Direction: Applicant must surrender within 45 days to avail consideration for bail under Amrawati and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh guidelines.

Jai Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11393 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Jai Kumar Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jagdish Prasad Tripathi,Urmila Tripathi

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the charge sheet no.2 of 2017 dated 24.01.2017 as well as cognizance order dated 16.03.2017 in Criminal Case No. 980 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No. 623 of 2016, under Sections 307, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Hathras, District- Hathras, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hathras.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case, owing to an earlier affidavit having been filed by the applicant against the opposite party no.2 in some other litigation. It is further submitted that looking into the nature of the injury no offence under Section 307 IPC, could ever be made out.

¶9

While there may be some substance in the submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant with respect to the nature of injury, however, at this stage it is difficult to quash the entire charge sheet especially when the commission of some offence clearly appears to be made out. As to the exact charge that may be framed the same may be examined by the learned Magistrate at the appropriate stage.

¶10

At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicant involves adjudication of a factual dispute and appraisal of evidence.

¶11

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P.

¶12

Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 .

¶13

The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶14

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 45 days and no more from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 4.7.2018 Lbm/-

Jai Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mumtaz and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gopi Nath Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hanumant Bahadur Pal Alias Hanumant Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vindhyavasini Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gulab Singh @Nitin Vs State of Up and Another