Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed to quash chargesheet and NBW. Court held that disputed facts require trial stage adjudication. Filed application dismissed.
Prayer for quashing of proceedings refused; NBW not quashed; bail application to consider co-accused bail status.
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. - 42
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3357 of 2018
Applicant :- Umesh Kumar Bind And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Kalp Nath Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Kalp Nath, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Ashish Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the chargesheet dated 11.1.2016 and NBW dated 3.9.2017 issued by Judicial Magistrate, Ist Bhadohi, in Case No.1699 of 2017, State vs. Awdhesh Prasad Bind and others in Case Crime No.379 of 2015, under Section 7 of Criminal Amendment Act, 1932, Section 3(1) of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act and Sections 145, 147, 148, 149, 152, 188, 323, 353 IPC, PSSuriyawan, District Sant Ravi Das Nagar, Bhadohi.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the co-accused person has already been granted bail. It is next submitted 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.
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 submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court 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 prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case based on the charge-sheet is refused.
The court below shall take into the fact that the co-accused of the present case has been granted bail by the competent court while considering the bail application of the applicant, if any, filed before it.
The application is accordingly, disposed of.
Order Date :- 7.2.2018 Deepika
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the chargesheet filed against the applicants discloses no offence or was instituted with malafide intention for harassment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. KapurReferred¶8
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866 · Who else cites this
State of HaryanaReferred¶8
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of BiharReferred¶8
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd.Referred¶8
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq, 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Umesh Kumar Bind
Ramesh Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
