Dismissed

Ram Gopal v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC15 Mar 2018A482/4254/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings under sections 307 and 326 IPC initiated against the applicant, citing insufficient grounds. However, it directed that no coercive action be taken for 30 days if the applicant surrenders and applies for bail, relying on precedent.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash proceedings and charge-sheet refused. Conditional stay on coercive action for 30 days if applicant surrenders and applies for bail.

Ram Gopal Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 17

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4254 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Gopal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit which is taken on record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved with a prayer to quash the proceedings in Session Trial No. 248 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No.86 of 2015 under sections 307/326 IPC P.S.Nigohi, District Shahjahanpur including charge sheet No.73/15 under section 307 IPC and charge sheet No.73A/15 under section 326 IPC , pending in the court of Additional District Judge-I, Shahjahanapur.

¶7

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the FIR the present accused-applicant has been assigned the role of exhortation. He is not actual assailant who fired upon the injured. He has already got himself bailed out under section 307 IPC on 2.3.2015 from the court below. He has been falsely implicated. The Investigating Officer has not made proper investigation in this matter and has filed charge-sheet in a routine manner. If proceedings are allowed to continue that would amount to an abuse of process of court.

¶8

Heard the argument of the learned counsel for the applicants and perused the record.

¶9

A perusal of the FIR indicates that the occurrence took place on 2.2.2015 at about 10.30 P.M. when the brother of the first informant was sleeping at the tube-well in the field. The present accused along with two other co-accused went to the place of occurrence and at the instance of the present accused Ram Gopal and Nar Singh, co-accused, Rajesh fired upon the brother of the first informant. The police after investigation has found the case proved and has submitted charge-sheet against the present accused. At this stage, the statement recorded by the police during investigation may not be disbelieved without trial in this case. Hence no substance is found in the argument of the learned counsel for the applicants. At this stage, no case is made out for quashing the charge sheet.

¶10

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case as

¶11

well as quashing charge-sheet is refused.

¶12

However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, then the bail application of the applicant be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid-down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment 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.

¶13

With aforesaid direction, this application is finally disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 15.3.2018 AU

Ram Gopal v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Gopal v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Bauwa Alias Arvind Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Kumar @ Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Jai Karan Vs State of U.P.

Suresh Kesharwani and 5 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Narendra Malik and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.