Allowed

Tufail and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Aug 2019A482/10714/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge held that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the complaint case proceedings due to staleness and false allegations lodged to harass applicants. The court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to quash the proceedings of the complaint case.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings of Complaint Case No. 148 of 2009 before Addl. Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Court No.14, Fatehpur were quashed.

Tufail and Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10714 of 2009

¶3

Applicant :- Tufail And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Ambrish Singh,D.K. Tiwari,Faizur Rahman,M.A.Khan,M.Moonis,Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,Sharad Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Case called out in the revised list. Learned counsel for the parties are present. Learned AGA is also present.

¶6

The applicants, through the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 148 of 2009, under Sections1 47, 148, 323, 452, 504, 506, 392 I.P.C., police station Kotwali, District Fatehpur, pending before the Addl. Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Court No.14, Fatehpur.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has pointed out that the matter was taken up by this Court on 14.5.2009 and interim protection was granted to the applicants.

¶8

Submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the false allegations have been levelled against 8 persons with regard to looting of one transistor and manhandling by entering into the house of complainant. It is next contended that in order to make undue pressure upon the applicants to enter into compromise in a case lodged earlier under sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC & Sec. 3/4 D.P.Act, the present FIR was lodged. It is further contented that false criminal cases have been lodged by opposite party no.2 just to harass the applicants with malafide intention.The matter pertains to the year 2009 which has come up for hearing after about 10 years of the alleged occurrence.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case.

¶10

In view of the above, the proceedings of the aforesaid Case are hereby, quashed.

¶11

The application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶12

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶13

Order Date :- 8.8.2019 IA

Tufail and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tufail and 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Virendra @ Sethi and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dr. S.P. Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Agarwal and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anurag Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Chandan Bose Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Tasannum and Others Vs State of U.P.and Another