Disposed

Ram Chet and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Nov 2018A482/39035/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition, the High Court refused to quash the summoning order, holding that it is a disputed question of fact for the trial court. The court directed the applicants to surrender and apply for bail within 30 days to avoid coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Petition for quashing rejected with liberty to apply for bail upon surrender within 30 days and stay of coercive action during that period.

Ram Chet and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39035 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Chet And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A-I for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 15.09.2018 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3 Gorakhpur as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1250/2016 (Radhey Shyam Vs. Ram Chet and others) u/s 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Harpur Budhat, District Gorakhpur pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Gorakhpur.

¶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 purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶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 applicant. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question 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 disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 or 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.

¶9

The prayer for quashing the summoning order is refused.

¶10

However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail may 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. For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶11

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off.

¶12

Order Date :- 20.11.2018 Arti

Ram Chet and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Chet and 4 Others 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandeep Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Ors.

Balwant Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sh. Sanjeev Narula Vs State of U.P. and Another

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