Disposed

Sarfaraj v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2018A482/5228/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court refused the applicant's prayer to quash a charge sheet under Section 482 Cr.P.C. However, granting a stay on coercive actions for 30 days, it directed the applicant to file a bail application within that period for consideration under specific guidelines. Failure to do so would render the order ineffective.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashment refused; coercive action stayed for 30 days; applicant directed to file bail application.

Sarfaraj Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5228 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Sarfaraj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

By way of the instant application, the applicant has sought for a direction of bail in Case No.336 of 2018 State Vs. Sarfaraj, arising out of Case Crime No.415 of 2016, under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, Police Station Hayatnagar, District Sambhal.

¶7

Contention has been raised on behalf of the applicant to the extent that in this case, the entire proceeding is in sheer abuse of process of the Court and there is no material on record justifying the filing of charge sheet against the applicant. There is no apparent error exist against the applicant. The court below applied its mind mechanically and took cognizance of the charge sheet which too is sheer abuse of process of the court itself and, therefore, entire proceeding stands vitiated and need be quashed by this Court.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for quashment of the charge sheet and submitted that the material on record is sufficient justifying the filing of charge sheet and so taking of the cognizance in the aforesaid offence by the court below.

¶9

Considered the above submissions and the contents disclosed in the first information report and charge sheet. No good ground is made out for quashment of the impugned charge sheet and the proceedings. Accordingly, the prayer for quashment of the impugned charge sheet and the proceedings is refused.

¶10

However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that in case the applicant appears before the court concerned within 30 days from today and moves application for bail, the same shall be considered and disposed of in terms of the guidelines / observations given in the judgment and order dated 3.7.2014 passed by this Court in Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 21679 of 2014-Munawwar and 9 others Vs. State of U.P. and another.

¶11

For a period of thirty days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶12

It is made clear that in the event no such application is moved within the time prescribed above, this order will be of no avail to the applicant.

¶13

With the above direction, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 19.2.2018 rkg

Sarfaraj v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarfaraj 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

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

Hanumant Vs State

Naresh Vs State

Ram Prakash and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Tunchi and Others Vs State

Rajesh Kumar and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another