Dismissed

Azahar and 5 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 May 2018A482/18588/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court refused the application to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the matter involved factual disputes. However, the Court directed that if the applicants surrender within 30 days and apply for bail, their application will be considered.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings refused; direction to consider bail application if applicant surrenders within 30 days.

Azahar and 5 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 49 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18588 of 2018 Applicant :- Azahar And 5 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Dubey 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 charge sheet dated 10.05.2017 and the entire proceedings of Case No. 2358 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No. 337 of 2015, under Sections 147, 452, 336, 436, 352, 353, 427 I.P.C., Police Station- Khetasarai, District- Jaunpur.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present prosecution has been lodged against the applicants by way of a counter blast to an earlier FIR lodged in respect of murder of the brother of the applicants no. 1, 2 and 3, wherein the relatives of the opposite party no.2 are the main accused.

¶6

At present it appears that the FIR has been lodged against the applicants by the police and the prosecution case supported by the statements of the police officials.

¶7

At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants involves adjudication of a factual dispute and appraisal of evidence.

¶8

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 .

¶9

The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

Order Date :- 25.5.2018/Lbm/-

Azahar and 5 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azahar and 5 Ors. 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

Adwitiya Saha and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tahreem Alias Chhotey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Son @ Sagun Singh Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Simirati Devi Vs Rampher

Smt. Heera @ Meena Vs State of U.P. and Another

Somnath Vs State of U.P.