Disposed

Yashpal Chugh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jun 2018A482/20764/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash the summoning order and criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as disputed facts could not be adjudicated. However, the court directed the trial court to refer the case to a mediation committee and allowed for other relief steps.

What did the court decide?

Application refused; case remitted to mediation; coercive action restrained pending mediation report; discharge application considered expeditiously.

Yashpal Chugh and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20764 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Yashpal Chugh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. in opposition and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 24.01.2018 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Devband, Saharanpur as well as the entire proceedings in Complaint Case No. 1909 of 2017 (Chainika v. Indrajeet and others), under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station - Devband, District - Saharanpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant 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 and as such, the present proceedings are sheer abuse of the process of the court.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made and the submissions thereof advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and contended that the learned trial court was justified in passing the impugned summoning order and as such, there is no illegality in the impugned order.

¶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

All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶11

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the summoning order as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby refused.

¶12

However, as per direction of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

¶13

Rajesh Sharma and others Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 2017 0 AIR (SC) 3869, learned Magistrate is directed to refer the case to committee constituted for mediation at District Court, Saharanpur within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶14

The committee of mediation centre shall submit its report within one month from the date of receipt of the case before the learned Magistrate.

¶15

If bail application is filed by the applicants, the same shall be decided according to direction contained in Rajesh Sharma 's case (supra).

¶16

It is further provided that in case applicant no. 1 - Yashpal Chugh claims discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. in person and applicant no. 2 - Smt. Laxmi claims discharge through counsel within 30 days from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously by the trial court.

¶17

Till the submission of report by the committed of mediation centre, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant no. 1.

¶18

Till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant no. 2.

¶19

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application stands disposed of .

¶20

Order Date :- 6.6.2018 I. Batabyal

Yashpal Chugh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yashpal Chugh 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

Smt. Shruti Maheshwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nishant Kushwaha @ Sharad and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sher Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tara and 10 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Mubarak Ali @ Mohd. Mubarik Ali and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another