The Court refused the application to quash criminal proceedings filed under Sections 379 and 506 IPC. However, it directed that bail applications filed by the applicants within 30 days of surrender would be considered in light of settled law.
Prayer for quashing refused. Bail considered if applicants surrender within 30 days and apply.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 49 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14880 of 2018 Applicant :- Navab Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mrityunjay Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard Sri Mrityunjay Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire criminal proceedings as well as impugned charge-sheet dated 01.02.2017, submitted by the Investigating Officer, in Case Crime No. 304 of 2018, under Sections 379, 506, IPC read with Section 4/10 Forest Act, Police Station Dadon, District Aligarh, upon which the learned Magistrate taken cognizance on 09.03.2018.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
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. 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 prayer for quashing the charge-sheet as well as criminal proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.
However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrenders before the court below within 30 days and no more from today and applies for bail, their 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.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of .
Order Date :- 16.5.2018 VKG
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings under Sections 379 and 506 IPC read with Forest Act should be quashed by this Court.
Whether the applicants are entitled to bail if they surrender within 30 days and apply accordingly.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶6
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan LalReferred¶6
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.SharmaReferred¶6
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful HaqReferred¶6
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 · Who else cites this
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶9
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶9
2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Navab Singh And 3 Others
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
