Dismissed

Nandei Saroj @ Narendra Kumar Saroj v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Oct 2018A482/33996/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings, the court held that prima facie a cognizable offence was made out. The court refused the prayer for quashing, dismissing the application, but directed the applicant to apply for bail within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash criminal proceedings dismissed; applicant directed to apply for bail within 30 days.

Nandei Saroj @ Narendra Kumar Saroj Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33996 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Nandei Saroj @ Narendra Kumar Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kailash Nath Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA and have taken through the record.

¶6

By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the applicant has invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the further proceedings initiated pursuant to the charge sheet dated 27.12.2017 whereupon cognizance has been taken against the applicant on 13.7.2018 by the court concerned to face the trial in Case Crime No.540 of 2017 under Sections 452/427/504/506/354 (ka) IPC, Police Station Mahrajganj, District Jaunpur.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case on the basis of false allegations made in the first information report. The entire prosecution story is based on fabricated facts which has culminated into grave injustice with the applicant. The investigation has also been done in very pedantic and flimsy manner which has culminated into charge sheet. Prima facie no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. The prosecution of the applicant on the basis of false allegations is nothing but sheer abuse of process of law and deserves to be vitiated.

¶8

Per contra learned AGA contended that the investigation was done in a fair and impartial manner and the investigating agency collected credible and clinching material on the basis of which charge sheet was submitted.

¶9

From the perusal of the materials on record and looking into the facts and after considering the arguments of the learned AGA for the State, it cannot be said that no offence has been made out against the applicant. Cognizance taken by the trial court, whereby the applicant has been summoned to face the trial suffers from no illegality and as such the prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused. At the stage of issuing process the court below is not expected to examine and assess in detail the material placed on record. Only this has to be seen whether prima facie cognizable offence is made out or not. The Apex Court has also laid down the guidelines in the case State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal, 1999 SCC(Crl) 426, and State of Bihar Vs. P. P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Crl) 192.where the criminal proceedings could be interfered and quashed in exercise of its power envisaged under section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶10

Having considered rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court does not find any justifiable ground for quashing the criminal proceedings initiated pursuant to the the charge sheet in the aforesaid case in exercise of its inherent powers conferred under section 482 Cr.P.C. The application is bereft of merits and is accordingly dismissed.

¶11

However, considering the facts and the circumstances of the case , it is directed that in case applicant appears before the court concerned in the aforesaid case within 30 days and applies for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of in accordance with law.

¶12

Order Date :- 8.10.2018 Naim

Nandei Saroj @ Narendra Kumar Saroj v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nandei Saroj @ Narendra Kumar Saroj 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

Uma Shankar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Uma Shankar Chaurasiya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nanne Khan Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Lachchho and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and another

Umesh Dubey and Another Vs State of Up and Another

Liyakat Ali @ Munna and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another