Smt. Saroj Devi v. State of U.P. and another
Case brief
What is this about?
Applicant sought quashing of charges and orders under Section 482 Cr.P.C. alleging malafide prosecution. Court held disputed facts cannot be adjudicated at this stage, refused quashing, but directed no coercive action for 30 days if applicant applies for recall of warrant or appears for bail.
What did the court decide?
Rejected quashing; directed no coercive action for 30 days if applicant files application for recall of warrant or appears for bail.
What the court decided
Court No. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8849 of 2018
Applicant :- Smt. Saroj Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 10.11.2011, summoning order dated 4.7.2012 and non-bailable-warrant order dated 27.9.2016 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Agra in Case No. 307 of 2012 (State vs. Saroj Devi) u/s 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, P.S. Saiya, District Agra.
The contention of the 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.
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.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there is a prima facie case of malafide prosecution against the applicant warranting quashing of the FIR and orders
Whether the applicant should be granted relief from coercive action while considering a fresh bail application
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Smt. Saroj Devi
- respondent
State Of U.P.
Coram
Rajul Bhargava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · March
- Registered
- Case no.
- A482/8849/2018
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court