The court examined an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash a summoning order. It held that allegations of no offence were not established at the current stage and dismissed the prayer for quashing.
Prayer for quashing the impugned order is refused.
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. - 14
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43128 of 2017 Applicant :- Prem Chand @ Chandra Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahesh Narain Singh,M.N. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 16.11.2017 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bareilly in S.T. No. 744 of 2016 (State Vs. Rajendra) arising out of Case Crime No. 0054 of 2016 under Sections 366, 376 I.P.C., Police Station Bisharatganj, District Bareilly summoning the applicant under Sections 366, 376D I.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that no offence against the applicant is disclosed. Present case has been filed with a mala fide intention for the purposes of harassment. He further contended that the entire allegations made against the applicant is false and fabricated. The applicant is innocent and has not committed any offence.
Learned A.G.A. contended that there is no illegality in passing impugned cognizance order by the Magistrate.
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. Dispute of facts is to be examined by the trial court on the basis of evidence, not by this Court at this stage.
In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the impugned order in the aforesaid case is refused.
However, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrender before the court below and apply for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously by court concerned.
With the above directions, this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 3.1.2018 Sharad/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the prayer under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the order summoning the applicant is maintainable in view of the facts disclosed.
Whether the applicant has committed an offence against the applicant.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Prem Chand @ Chandra Pal
State Of U.P.
Umesh Chandra Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
