Dismissed

Israr and 3 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2018A482/39009/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court declined to set aside criminal proceedings or summoning orders pending in a Magistrate Court. It held that disputed factual issues and defence submissions could not be adjudicated under section 482 Cr.PC at this stage and directed the applicants to seek discharge through proper channels.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing proceedings and summoning order refused; application disposed of with direction to file discharge application if applicable.

Israr and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39009 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Israr And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State and also perused the record.

¶6

This application has been filed under section 482 Cr.PC with a prayer to set aside the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 3188 of 2016 (Madanpal v. Israr and others) under section 323,452,506 IPC, Police Station- Chandausi, District- Moradabad, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal and summoning order dated 2.2.2017.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. It is further contended that applicants are on bail.

¶8

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. 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.PC. At this stage only prime facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.)283 . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶9

Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge under section 239 or 227/228 Cr.PC. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.

¶10

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the court concerned is refused.

¶11

With the above directions, present application is disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 22.11.2018 ssm

Israr and 3 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Israr and 3 Others v. State of Up 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

Asrar Ahmad and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhishek Agrawal and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Samsuddin and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jarif Ahmad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Kaushilya Vs State of U.P. and another

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