Partly allowed

Pal Singh @ Jaspal Singh v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC4 May 2018A482/13385/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash a charge sheet and cognizance order on factual grounds, holding that no prima facie case for quashing exists. The applicant was granted a limited window to surrender and apply for bail without coercive action for 45 days.

What did the court decide?

The application for quashing was refused; however, coercive action was stayed for 45 days if the applicant surrenders and applies for bail.

Pal Singh @ Jaspal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13385 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Pal Singh @ Jaspal Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Radhey Shyam Shukla,Vipul Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned charge sheet No.30 of 2017 dated 14.08.2017, having endorsement of cognizance order dated 10.11.2017 including entire proceeding of Case No.5750 of 2017, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-II, Shahjahanpur (State vs. Pal Singh @ Jaspal Singh) in Case Crime No.1908 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 307 I.P.c. and Section 3(i)X SC/St Act, P.S. Puwayan, District Shahjahanpur.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶8

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. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred 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. 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the impugned charge sheet No.30 of 2017 dated 14.08.2017, cognizance order dated 10.11.2017 including entire proceeding of aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.

¶10

However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 45 days from today and applies for bail, then the bail application of the applicant 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 judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 45 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶11

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

¶12

Order Date :- 4.5.2018 Jitendra

Pal Singh @ Jaspal Singh v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pal Singh @ Jaspal Singh v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Jitendra Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ekhlakh Aahmad and another Vs State of U.P. and another

Tabassum and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Radhey Shyam and Another Vs State of U.P.

Dr Mustaq Husain Vs State of Up and Another

Gopal Vishwkarma Vs State of U.P. and Another