This court refused to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC as the application relied on disputed facts. The court directed that if the applicant surrenders within 45 days, his bail application will be considered.
Quashing of proceedings refused; liberty granted to approach trial court for bail within 45 days of surrender.
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. - 45
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3895 of 2018
Applicant :- Rajat Kulshrestha Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Indra Kumar Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manish Tiwari
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Manish Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the criminal proceeding in criminal case no. 43553 of 2017 on the basis of charge sheet dated 1.9.2017 arising out of Case Crime No. 0371 of 2017 under sections 420,467, 468, 471 I.P.C. P.S. New Agra District Agra pending in the court of C.J.M., Agra.
The contention of 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.
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 applicant. 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.
However, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Till than no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.
However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
It is made clear that the applicants will not be granted any further time by this Court for surrendering before the Court below as directed above.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 12.12.2018 Atul kr. sri.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC as no offence is disclosed.
Whether the applicant can be granted bail if he surrenders before the court below within 45 days.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of PunjabExplained¶8
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan LalExplained¶8
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.SharmaExplained¶8
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and anotherExplained¶8
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 · Who else cites this
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶10
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶10
2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajat Kulshrestha
State Of U.P.
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
