Disposed

Mayank v. State of U.P. and another

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2018A482/8758/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash a charge sheet alleged to be mala fide, the court refused the prayer as disputed facts cannot be adjudicated at this stage. However, the applicant was granted protection from coercive action for 30 days if he appears before the trial court to apply for bail.

What did the court decide?

Protection from coercive action for 30 days if applicant appears to apply for bail.

Mayank Vs State of U.P. and another — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8758 of 2018 Applicant :- Mayank Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Zafar Abbas Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Zafar Abbas, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶4

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing charge sheet dated 24.09.2017 in Criminal Case No.15343 of 2017 (State Versus Sukhdesh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.429 of 2017 under Section 307 I.P.C., P.S. Nakhasa, District Sambhal, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-6,Moradabad.

¶5

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is 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.

¶6

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 applicant. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, 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.

¶7

The prayer for quashing the proceedings as well as order impugned is refused.

¶8

However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided on same day 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. , taking into account that main accused,Sukhdesh who has been attributed role of firing has already been granted bail. 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.

¶9

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

¶10

Order Date :- 19.3.2018/MN/-

Mayank v. State of U.P. and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mayank 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

Raju Patel Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Jalalu Alias Jalaluddin Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Pradeep and another Vs State of U.P. and another

Deepak Kumar Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and Ors.

Mukesh Pal and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.