Dismissed

Kamlesh Kumar Verma and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Oct 2018A482/33772/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash proceedings under Section 482 CrPC as factual disputes prevent exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction. However, granting bail on the same day or interim bail if delayed, and no coercive action for 45 days.

What did the court decide?

Refused quashing of proceedings; directed bail to be decided same day; prohibited coercive action for 45 days.

Kamlesh Kumar Verma and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 22

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33772 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Verma And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sita Ram, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sandeep Kumar Srivastava, 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, 1973 (in short 'Code') has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of charge sheet dated 05.02.2017 and the cognizance order dated 23.12.2017 in Case No. 6213 of 2017 (State v. Kamlesh Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 30 of 2017, under Section 2/3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station - Sikandarpur, District - Ballia.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that from the material brought on the record, no offence is disclosed against the applicants. The present prosecution launched against the applicants is wholly mala fide as such, the present proceedings are sheer abuse of the process of the court.

¶8

From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case, it cannot be said at this stage that no offence is made out against the applicants.

¶9

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 the Code.

¶10

Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings as well as the cognizance order in the aforesaid case is refused.

¶11

However, none of the aforesaid offences alleged against applicants is punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years. Police has submitted charge sheet. All the materials relevant for disposal of bail application is available on record before trial court/court concerned.

¶12

In view of order passed by this Court on 23.01.2018 in Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 43217 of 2017 (Smt. Sakeena and others Vs. State) , it is directed that in case the applicants file their bail application, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided on the same day. If for any reason it is not possible to decide the regular bail application on the same day, then prayer for interim bail shall be considered and decided on the same day.

¶13

For a period of 45 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 11.10.2018 I. Batabyal

Kamlesh Kumar Verma and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlesh Kumar Verma 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

Dileep Patel Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rohtash Singh and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Uday Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Banti Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashalam and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Atul Kushawah Vs State of U.P. and Another