Disposed

Santosh Singh Bhadauria and 5 Others v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC10 Oct 2018A482/32616/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings for domestic violence and related IPC offences filed by the applicant facing harassment allegations, the court refused the prayer for immediate quashing. Instead, the court granted a temporary stay on coercive action for five months, provided the applicant files a discharge application within one month.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash proceedings refused; temporary stay on coercive action granted for five months contingent on filing a discharge application within one month.

Santosh Singh Bhadauria and 5 Others Vs State of U.P.and… — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32616 of 2016

¶3

Applicant :- Santosh Singh Bhadauria And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Pandey,Shamsuddin Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Roshan Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding of complaint case no.2091 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 and 406 and 3/4 of D.P.Act, P.S. Vijay Nagar, District Ghaziabad and summoning order dated 02.09.2016 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, court no.II, Ghaziabad.

¶7

The contention of the 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.

¶8

The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C., as the case may be, through a proper application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.

¶9

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments made in the present application, the prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case is refused.

¶10

However, it is provided that in case, the applicants move an appropriate application for discharge through counsel before the concerned Court below within a period of one month from today, the same shall be considered and disposed off as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, by the concerned court below preferably within a period of four months, thereafter. For a period of five months from today or till the disposal of the discharge application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶11

In case no such application is filed within a period of one month from today, as prescribed above, the present order shall stand automatically vacated.

¶12

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

¶13

Order Date :- 10.10.2018 Asha

Santosh Singh Bhadauria and 5 Others v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Singh Bhadauria and 5 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

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

Atar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kapil Gaur and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bablu @ Aditya Kumar Vs State of U.P. and another

Ram Sevak and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another