Disposed

Bhupendra Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2018A482/16497/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused the quashing of criminal proceedings against applicants. However, noting the offences carry less than seven years imprisonment, it directed the trial court to decide bail on the same day of filing, issued a 60-day stay on coercive action, and disposed of the application.

What did the court decide?

Refused quashing of proceedings; directed trial court to dispose of bail application within one day; granted 60-day stay on coercive action.

Bhupendra Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16497 of 2017

¶3

Applicant :- Bhupendra Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Kumar Mishra,Praveen Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Alpika Srivastava,Neeraj Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A., for the State. Perused the record.

¶6

This application under Secton-482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed praying for quashing of the criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No.131 of 2017 (State vs Sunny and others) arising out of Case Crime No.251 of 2016, under Sections-147, 448, 323, 504, 354 (B) of I.P.C., Police Station-Ghaziabad Kotwali, District-Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.7, Ghaziabad.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants contended that from the material brought on the record, no offence is disclosed against the applicants. The present prosecution launched against the applicants is wholly mala fide as such, the present proceedings are an abuse of the process of the court.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. contended that there is no illegality in passing impugned order by the trial court.

¶9

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.

¶10

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶11

However, none of the aforesaid offences against applicants is punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years. All the materials relevant for disposal of bail application is available on record before trial court/court concerned.

¶12

In view of order passed by this Court in Smt. Sakeena and another Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 2018 (2) ACR 2190 , it is directed that in case the applicants file their bail application, prayer for their bail shall be considered and decided on the same day. If for any reason it is not possible to decide the regular bail application on the same day, then prayer for interim bail shall be considered and decided on the same day.

¶13

For a period of 60 days from today or till they surrender and apply for bail, whichever, is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against applicants.

¶14

With the above directions, this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., is disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 28.11.2018 Jaswant

Bhupendra Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhupendra Singh and Another 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

Om Singh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Mithlesh and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Meena Devi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yadunath Singh @ Jadunath Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahmood and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajneesh Vs State of U.P. and Another