Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing criminal proceedings due to alleged harassment was dismissed. Court directed no coercive action if applicants surrender and apply for bail within 45 days.
Prayer for quashing refused; no coercive action for 45 days if applicants surrender and apply for bail.
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. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8155 of 2018
Applicant :- Haridwar Singh Yadav And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Muktesh Kumar Singh,Ramkripal Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Neeraj Kumar, Sri Deepak kumar, counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 51/2018 arising out of case crime no. 257/2017 (State vs. Haridwar Singh and others) u/s 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(r) SC/ST Act, P.S. Baluwa, District Chandauli as well as chargesheet dated 2.2.2018.
The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants are 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.
Per contra learned A.G.A. Submitted that 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. The submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants relate to disputed question of facts, 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.
The submissions made by learned A.G.A. have force.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case and the chargesheet is refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall 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 45 days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for 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.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 15.3.2018 Dhirendra/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the proceedings implicating the applicants under various Sections of IPC and SC/ST Act should be quashed for lack of offence or malafide institution.
Whether the disputed question of facts regarding malafide intention can be adjudicated upon by this Court at the pre-trial stage.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of PunjabExplained¶8
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan LalExplained¶8
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar Vs. P.P. SharmaExplained¶8
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful HaqExplained¶8
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 · Who else cites this
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.Relied on¶11
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.Relied on¶11
2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
6 provisions across 3 enactments
Haridwar Singh Yadav And 2 Others
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
