Disposed

Prem Pal and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 May 2018A482/17871/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought to quash criminal proceedings arising from a civil lease dispute. The court refused to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order as the matter involved disputed factual questions. However, the court directed applicants to surrender within 30 days to seek bail consideration, warning of coercive action for non-compliance.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing refused. Directed applicants to surrender and apply for bail within 30 days; failure to do so will attract coercive action.

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

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17871 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Prem Pal And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Rajeev Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 14.4.2018 and cognizance order dated 1.5.2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 284 of 2017, under Sections 423, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Hasayan, District Hathras, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Hathras.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature. While the applicants claims under a lease deed executed by the Gram Pradhan in the year 1973, the opposite party no.2 claims under a lease deed executed by the S.D.M. A civil suit is also stated to be pending between the parties wherein the applicants claims injunction against the opposite party no.2.

¶9

Sri Rajeev Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that the lease deed claimed in the yar 1973 could never have been executed as the plot in question was declared abadi only in the year 1979. At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants involve factual dispute and appraisal of evidence.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

Singh Vs. State of U.P.

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 23.5.2018 Mini

Prem Pal and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Pal 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

Sachin @ Rinku Sahu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmveer and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nisar Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Gulam Sabir Vs State of U.P. and Another

Madan Kumar and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Francis Vs State of U.P.