Dismissed

Gyan Prakash Agarwal and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2019A482/11251/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Application seeking quashing of FIR and proceedings alleging malicious prosecution over a civil dispute regarding cooperative society membership was dismissed. The Court held that a prima facie case of offence existed and facts were disputed, requiring trial court determination. Alternative discharge application was suggested.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing proceedings under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC is refused.

Gyan Prakash Agarwal and Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11251 of 2010

¶3

Applicant :- Gyan Prakash Agarwal And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,R.P. Dwivedi

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties and learned AGA appearing for the State.

¶6

The applicants, through the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with the prayer that the proceeding of case no. 9306/2010, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Indrapuram, District Ghaziabad, pending before the Court below, be quashed.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the matter pertains to purely civil dispute and the applicants have been dragged maliciously into criminal offence and the police without proper investigation charge sheeted the applicants.It is next contended that report has been lodged after a lapse of about 6 years of the alleged incident for which no plausible explanation has been given by the prosecution. The opposite party no.2 had fraudulently obtained membership of Cooperative Society by furnishing wrong declaration and information and the Management Committee had terminated her membership. It is further contended that in a very similar and identical matter the charge sheet was challenged before this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.10913 of 2008 in which the Court had stayed the proceeding vide order dated 4.7.2008, which is annexed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit.

¶8

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

¶9

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 applicants. 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.

¶10

Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge under section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. through their counsel as the case may be by moving 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.

¶11

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the court concerned is refused.

¶12

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off. Order Date :- 17.4.2019 IA

Gyan Prakash Agarwal and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gyan Prakash Agarwal 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Prakashi Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sartaj and and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rojan Shah Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Netra Pal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ganesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Vs State of U.P.