Dismissed

Atul Kushawah v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Oct 2018A482/33792/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This applicant petition challenged a charge sheet and summoning order. The court held that disputed facts precluded quashing and refused the prayer, but granted a 45-day coercive action moratorium and directed immediate bail consideration upon custody.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quash refused; no coercive action for 45 days; bail to be disposed same day as custody.

Atul Kushawah Vs State of U.P. and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 22

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33792 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Atul Kushwaha Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- P.K. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶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 Charge Sheet No. 30 of 2018 dated 19.04.2018 as well as the summoning order dated 15.06.2018, in Case No. 564 of 2018 (State v. Atul Kushwaha and others), under Section 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station - Mahila Thana, District - Gautam Budh Nagar, pending in the court of C.J.M., Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants contended that from the material brought on the record, no offence is disclosed against the applicants. The present prosecution is launched against the applicants with mala fide intention for the purpose of harassment and as such, the present proceedings are sheer abuse of the process of the court.

¶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 filing of charge sheet and passing of the impugned 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 charge sheet and the summoning order in the aforesaid case is refused.

¶12

However, it is directed that if applicant applies for bail, the same shall be disposed of on the same day on which he is 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 45 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶14

With the aforesaid directions, the application stands finally disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 11.10.2018 I. Batabyal

Atul Kushawah v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul Kushawah 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

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