Dismissed

Arun Alias Arun Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2018A482/37408/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this quashing application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant sought to quash proceedings for an alleged offence under Section 376 IPC. The court held that the submissions involved disputed questions of fact require trial court adjudication and the case did not fall under exceptions justifying quashing. The application was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing of criminal proceedings and summoning order refused and dismissed.

Arun Alias Arun Sharma Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37408 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Arun Alias Arun Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Sharan Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings including summoning order dated 09.06.2017 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahrajganj in complaint case no.2030 of 2016, under Section 376 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Mahrajganj.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant 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.

¶8

Offence committed by the applicant is heinous in nature. All the contentions raised by the applicant's counsel relates to disputed questions of fact. The veracity and credibility of material furnished on behalf of the prosecution has been questioned and false implication has been pleaded.

¶9

Through a catena of decisions given by Hon'ble Apex Court this legal aspect has been expatiated upon at length and the law that has evolved over a period of several decades is too well settled. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has given the board principles which emerge from the precedents on the subject in its judgement in the case of Prabathbai Aahir @ Prabatbhai vs. State of Gujrat (2017) 9 SCC 641.

¶10

The Apex Court decisions given in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866 and in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC(Cr.) 426 have also recognized certain categories by way of illustration which may justify the quashing of a complaint or charge sheet. Some of them are akin to the illustrative examples given in the above referred case of Smt. Nagawwa Vs. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi 1976 3 SCC 736 . The cases where the allegations made against the accused or the evidence collected by the Investigating Officer do not constitute any offence or where the allegations are absurd or extremely improbable impossible to believe or where prosecution is legally barred or where criminal proceeding is malicious and malafide instituted with ulterior motive of grudge and vengeance alone may be the fit cases for the High Court in which the criminal proceedings may be quashed. Hon'ble Apex Court in Bhajan Lal's case has recognized certain categories in which Section-482 of Cr.P.C. or Article-226 of the Constitution may be successfully invoked.

¶11

Illumined by the case law referred to herein above, this Court has adverted to the entire record of the case.

¶12

The submissions made by the applicants' learned counsel call for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court and while doing so even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court in this case. This Court does not deem it proper, and therefore cannot be persuaded to have a pre-trial before the actual trial begins. A threadbare discussion of various facts and circumstances, as they emerge from the allegations made against the accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. I do not find any justification to quash the complaint or the proceedings against the applicants arising out of them as the case does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Apex Court which may justify their quashing.

¶13

The prayer for quashing the same. is refused as I do not see any abuse of the court's process either.

¶14

Accordingly, the present application is dismissed.

¶15

Order Date :- 29.11.2018 Asha

¶16

(Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)

Arun Alias Arun Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Alias Arun Sharma 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

Lalit and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Milan Nishad Vs State of U.P. and another

Ram Krishan Vs State of Up and Another

Shivkant Singh Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kapil Chauhan @ Kapil Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another