In an application to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the court held that disputes on facts cannot be adjudicated at this stage as a prima facie case was made out.
Quashing refused; 45 days surrender granted for bail consideration; coercive action stayed for 45 days.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 17
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12332 of 2005
Applicant :- Ram Saran And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- R.P. Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Learned counsel for the applicants is permitted to correct the name of applicant no. 12 as Jai Ram in place of Jag Ram.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and perused the material available on record.
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 365 (IX) 2005 (State Versus Banwari & 18 Others) under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506 & 307 I.P.C., Police Station Chhata, Distirct Mathura pending in the court of IV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that offence under Section 307 I.P.C. is not made out in this case. He further submitted that prosecution has submitted a false and frivolous injury report. Hence, it is a false case against the applicants only to harass them.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it appears prima facie offence is made out against the applicants. Charge sheet against the applicants has been submitted after proper appreciation of the documentary evidence.
All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred 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 according to the
provisions prescribed in Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
The prayer for quashing the proceeding, is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants be considered and decided, if possible on the same day, in view of the settled law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. For a period of 45 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.
With the aforesaid directions, the application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 27.2.2019 Vibha Singh alonwith .
1 issue framed by the court
Whether Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to quash criminal proceedings where a prima facie case exists.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶10
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan LalReferred¶10
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.SharmaReferred¶10
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and anotherReferred¶10
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ram Saran And Others
State Of U.P.
Suresh Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
