Disposed

Vijay Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 May 2018A482/16580/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought to quash a charge sheet and summoning order. The court refused to quash the proceedings but directed the applicant to surrender within 30 days for bail consideration, warning of coercive action if they fail to comply.

What did the court decide?

Application refused; applicant directed to surrender within 30 days for bail consideration.

Vijay Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 49 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16580 of 2018 Applicant :- Vijay Kumar And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kripa Shankar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶3

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

¶4

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet no. 182 of 2015, dated 8.9.2015 and summoning order/cognizance order dated 3.6.2016, in criminal case no. 2062 of 2016 (State of U.P. Vs. Vijay Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 250 of 2015, under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Cholapur, District Varanasi, pending in the Court of learned 1st Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi.

¶5

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants are 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.

¶6

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 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.

¶7

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case based on the charge-sheet is refused.

¶8

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days and no more from today and apply 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.

¶9

However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶10

It is made clear that the applicants will not be granted any further time by this Court for surrendering before the Court below as directed above.

¶11

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

¶12

Order Date :- 15.5.2018/Mini

Vijay Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar and 3 Others 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

Ram Jagi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Smt. Anuradha Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Smt. Nitu Tyagi Vs State of U.P.

Prabhakar Dubey and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Benchelal Vs State of Up and Anotehr

Nadeem Vs State of U.P. and Another