Dismissed

Ashok Kumar and 4 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Oct 2018A482/32190/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings, the court rejected the contention that no offence was made out, as disputed facts cannot be adjudicated at this stage. Consequently, the prayer for quashing was refused. However, a conditional stay was granted, providing immunity from coercive action for four weeks if the applicants surrender and apply for bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing refused; coercive action stayed for four weeks conditionally upon surrender for bail.

Ashok Kumar and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32190 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Ashok Kumar And 4 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Onkar Nath Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings including summoning order dated 01.09.2017 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) FTC/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Eta in Complaint Case No.43 of 2017, under Sections 323, 380, 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Awagarh, District Etah.

¶7

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 purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. At last he submitted that the applicants are ready to appear before the court and to face the trial. He sought some time to surrender before the court below.

¶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. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash summoning order and the criminal proceedings in the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.

¶10

However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within four weeks from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants 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 judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of four weeks from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the

¶11

Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶12

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

¶13

Order Date :- 9.10.2018

¶14

Asha

Ashok Kumar and 4 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar and 4 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

Abdul Saleem and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Shamim Hasan and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sharad Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Savitri and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Atar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

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