Disposed

Ram Sharan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2018A482/9435/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash charge sheet and proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed. Court directed applicant to surrender and apply for bail within 30 days; failure to appear triggers coercive action. Application disposed with conditional directions on surrender timing and bail consideration.

What did the court decide?

Application for quash refused; bail prayer to be considered upon surrender within 30 days.

Ram Sharan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9435 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Sharan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 2.11.2017 alongwith cognizance order dated 23.11.2017 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 3697/IX of 2017, State Vs. Ram Sharan and another, arising out of Case Crime No. 386 of 2017, under Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station Karwi Kotwali Nagar, District Chitrakoot, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chitrakoot.

¶7

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 purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶8

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 at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions 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.

¶9

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case based on the charge-sheet is refused.

¶10

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days and no more from today and applies for bail, his 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.

¶11

However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶12

It is made clear that the applicant will not be granted any further time by this Court for surrendering before the Court below as directed above.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 4.4.2018

¶15

Mini

Ram Sharan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sharan 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

Dilip Juneja Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mukesh and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Baburam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sarla Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Badruddin Shamsi Vs State of U.P. and Another