Dismissed

Subhash Basu and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2018A482/28228/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of a summoning order in a matrimonial dispute, the court refused to quash proceedings as the case involved disputed questions of fact. However, bail was directed to be disposed of promptly upon custody, with no coercive action for 60 days.

What did the court decide?

Refused quashing of summoning order; granted 60-day reprieve from coercive action; directed timely disposal of bail application.

Subhash Basu and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28228 of 2016

¶3

Applicant :- Subhash Babu And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Neta Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Pal Singh Jadaun

¶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 'Code') has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 7.6.2015 passed in Complaint Case No. 322 of 2014 (Rajani Vs. Subhash Babu and another) under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Sasani, District Hathras.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants contended that from the material brought on the record, no offence is disclosed against the applicants.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer made and submissions thereof advanced by learned counsel for the applicants and contended that the material on record was sufficient justifying in passing of the summoning order in the aforesaid case.

¶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 Code.

¶11

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

¶12

However, it is directed that if applicants apply for bail, the same shall be disposed of on the same day, on which they shall be taken into custody as per the guidelines prescribed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and Another Vs. Union of India reported in 2018 SCC Online SC 1501 .

¶13

For a period of 60 days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶14

This application stands disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 10.12.2018

¶16

Jaswant

Subhash Basu and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Basu 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

Siddharth Paliwal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Janki Vs State of U.P.

Ram Ujagir Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanju Gupta and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt.Kiran Singh Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others