The Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash criminal proceedings for lack of offence or malafide motive, dismissing it as involving disputed facts unsuitable for adjudication at this stage.
The application for quashing proceedings and quashing of the impugned order is refused and dismissed.
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. - 1
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15632 of 2018
Applicant :- Pramod Soni And Another Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri A.K. Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Ms. Anjali Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Special Case No. 193 of 2017 arising out of case crime no. 1343 of 2015 under sections 354 Ka I.P.C. and 10 POCSO Act, police station Maudaha, District Hamirpur and the order dated 31.10.2017 passed in the aforesaid case.
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 purposes of 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 applicants. 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 proceedings of the aforesaid case and the impugned order is refused.
The application lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.5.2018 Shiraz
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the proceedings under sections 354 Ka IPC and 10 POCSO Act should be quashed due to lack of offence or malafide intention.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶8
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan LalReferred¶8
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.SharmaReferred¶8
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful HaqReferred¶8
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pramod Soni And Another
Ramesh Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
