Dismissed

Dharmendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2018A482/40384/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court refused the prayer to quash a non-bailable warrant order in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court noted that disputed questions of fact could not be adjudicated at this stage, holding that no prima facie case for quashing was established. It granted directions for a 30-day stay on coercive action if the applicant appears or applies for bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash the non-bailable warrant order refused. Applicant granted 30 days to appear for bail or apply for recall of warrant without coercive action.

Dharmendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40384 of 2018 Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- R.V. Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶3

Heard Sri R.V. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State.

¶4

The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the nonbailable-warrant order dated 05.05.2009 in consequential order dated 08.08.2016 including the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1651 of 1999 (Shobh Nath Vs. Dharmendra Kumar and others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mughalsarai, District Chandauli pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli.

¶5

The contention of the 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.

¶6

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.

¶7

The prayer for quashing the order impugned is refused.

¶8

However, it is provided that if the applicant files an application for recalling of the non-bailable-warrant issued against him within 30 days from today, the said application may be considered and disposed as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law or in case, the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his 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 applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶9

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off. Order Date :- 13.11.2018/Arti

Dharmendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra Kumar 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

Smt. Sangeeta @ Suneeta Vs State of U.P. and Another

M/S Rohtas Project Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and another

Smt. Sunayana Vs State of U.P. and 6 Ors.

Rajendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Girish Agrawal Vs Union of India through the Assistant Commissioner Customs (Preventive) Division and another

Ram Naresh and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another