Dismissed

Chaman Prakash and 9 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Mar 2019A482/11214/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court refused quashing of criminal proceedings instituted against applicants, holding disputed facts not suitable for adjudication under Section 482. Court permitted surrender and bail application with immunity from coercive action for 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing refused; 30-day stay on coercive action granted contingent on surrender and bail application.

Chaman Prakash and 9 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 33 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11214 of 2019 Applicant :- Chaman Prakash And 9 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Nandan Pandey,Sanjeev Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶2

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶3

This Crl. Misc. application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 386 of 2017 (Prem Chandra Vs Chaman Prakash and others) under Sections 147, 149, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, pending in the court of CJM, Etah as well as summoning order dated 6.10.2017 passed by CJM, Etah.

¶4

Perusal of complaint discloses that applicants entered the house of the complainant and committed marpeet with kicks, fist and danda and also extended threat to kill him and when wife of the complainant tried to save her husband, she has also been assaulted and outraged by the accused applicant.

¶5

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment.

¶6

From the perusal of 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. All the submissions 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. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge under Section 245 Cr.P.C. through a proper application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court including those which have been canvassed by them before this Court in this application.

¶7

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

¶8

Accordingly the prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case is refused. However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 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. 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 applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶9

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

¶10

Order Date :- 29.3.2019/RavindraKSingh

Chaman Prakash and 9 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chaman Prakash and 9 Ors. 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

Rajendra Singh Vs Addl. Collector F and R and 3 Ors.

Dr. Mahesh Prasadrtd. Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Gulab Singh Vs Boadrd of U.P. and Others

Rampal Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U P and Another

Rahul Kumar and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another