Court refused to quash charge sheet or cognizance order in FCCR proceedings due to factual disputes requiring evidence appraisal, but directed surrender for bail consideration within 30 days and stayed the non-bailable warrant.
Order of 30 days to surrender for bail application consideration and stay of non-bailable warrant issued.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 60 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25699 of 2017 Applicant :- Delip Kumar Gupta And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Padmaker Pandey,Sunil Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandan Sharma
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 30.5.2017, cognizance order dated 22.7.2017 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 6050 of 2017 (State of U.P. Vs. Dilip Kumar Gupta and another) arising out of case Crime No. 45 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 498A I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Fatehpur, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehpur.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is 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. It is further contended that now court below has issued Non-Bailable warrant dated 10.9.2018 against the applicants.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicants and perused the materials brought on record, it does not appear to be a fit case to quash the charge sheet as well as cognizance order. The prayer to quash the same is hereby refused, at this stage as the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicant involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.
However, looking at the nature of offence alleged and attending facts and circumstances of the case, as have been brought on record, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days 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 Supreme Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
For a period of 30 days from today, the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicants shall be kept in abeyance.
The present application stands disposed of .
Order Date :- 15.11.2018/Rmk.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to quash the charge sheet, cognizance order, and criminal proceedings given arguments of no offence and malafide prosecution.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.Explained¶7
2004 (57) ALR 290 Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.Explained¶7
2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Delip Kumar Gupta
State of U.P.
Neeraj Tiwari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
