Dismissed

Rashid Beg and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Jun 2018A482/20134/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court dismissed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings. Court held sufficient grounds for Section 308 IPC offence exist, but waived coercive action and ordered expeditious bail consideration for two applicants.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed; coercive action stayed for 30 days for two applicants; bail to be considered quickly.

Rashid Beg and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20134 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Rashid Beg And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kashif Zaidi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama has been filed by Shri Kuldeep Singh Chahar, Advocate on behalf of Opposite Party No. 2 today in the Court, is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 6901233/2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 453/2017 (State Vs. Asif & Others), under Sections 147, 149, 323, 325, 504, 506 and 308 I.P.C. and 7th Criminal Law Amendment Act Police Station - Shahganj, District Agra, pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4 Agra.

¶8

As per prosecution version, on 08.08.2017 at about 8:15 p.m. Akash Saraswat, nephew of informant/complainant Shyam Saraswat, was coming from the Hanuman Temple. In the way, applicants/accused Asif Beg, Shahid Beg, Rashid Beg and Arun Goswami have assaulted on Akash Saraswat, Ram Saraswat, Mahesh Saraswat and Suresh Chandra Saraswat due to which they sustained injury. Ram Saraswat has sustained grievous injuries including one fore head injury which is dangerous to his life.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants contended that from the perusal of report of medical board, offence under Section 308 I.P.C. is not made out against applicants. Present case has been filed with a mala fide intention for the purposes of harassment. He further contended that applicant no. 1 Rashid Beg and applicant no. 4 Arun Goswami are not enlarged on bail.

¶10

Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. contended that from the perusal of F.I.R., offence under Section 308 I.P.C. is made out against the applicants.

¶11

After investigation police has submitted charge-sheet under Section 308 I.P.C. At this stage, it cannot be said that offence under Section 308 I.P.C. is not made out. Moreover at the stage of trial, as per provision of Section 227 Cr.P.C., after considering the record of the case and hearing the accused and the prosecution, Sessions Court consider that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding under Section 308 I.P.C. against accused, accused shall be discharged for the offence punishable under Section 308 I.P.C.

¶12

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

¶13

In the result, the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

¶14

However, it is directed that in case the applicant no. 1 Rashid Beg and applicant no. 4 Arun Goswami appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously 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.

¶15

For a period of thirty days, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant no. 1 Rashid Beg and applicant no. 4 Arun Goswami.

¶16

Order Date :- 4.6.2018

¶17

Sharad/-

Rashid Beg and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rashid Beg 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

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

Anju Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brij Mohan Pandey Vs State of Up and Another

Pushpa Devi and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajveer and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashvani Kumar Pal Vs State of U.P. and Anr.