Partly allowed

Taufiq Ahmad and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Mar 2018A482/8213/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the application under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings regarding allegations under Section 498A IPC and the Domestic Violence Act, holding that disputed facts require a trial. However, the Court granted a direction for no coercive action for 45 days if the applicants surrender and apply for bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing dismissed. Direction issued for no coercive action for 45 days if applicants surrender and apply for bail.

Taufiq Ahmad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8213 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Taufiq Ahmad And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Srivastava,Vinod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 5897 of 2017 arising out of case crime no. 678 of 2016 (State vs. Tausif @ Kashif and others) u/s 498A, 323, 324, 325, 307, 420 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Gangoh, District Saharanpur as well as chargesheet dated 25.7.2017 and order dated 1.9.2017.

¶7

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.

¶8

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.

¶9

The submissions made by learned A.G.A. have force.

¶10

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case and the chargesheet is refused.

¶11

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.

¶12

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.

¶13

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 15.3.2018 Dhirendra/

Taufiq Ahmad and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Taufiq Ahmad and 2 Others 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

Kapil and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Nar Singh Gupta @ Nar Singh Prasad and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Haridwar Singh Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

gyan chandra and another Vs state of up and another

Babita Yadav Vs State of U.P and 3 Others