Dismissed

Pankaj Agarwal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 May 2019A482/12920/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash criminal proceedings, the High Court declined to interfere, directing the applicant to approach the trial court for conditional discharge if grounds of innocence arise, with a stay on coercive action pending a three-week window.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action to be taken for three weeks; applicant directed to seek discharge at trial court if innocent.

Pankaj Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and Another — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12920 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Pankaj Agarwal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pulak Ganguly,Sunil Kumar Upadhyay

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1294 of 2017, Praveen Kumar Rastogi Vs. Pankaj Agarwal, P.S. Kotwali, District Rampur, under Sections 323, 420 I.P.C. and the summoning order dated 17.8.2017 passed by A.C.J.M. Rampur in Complaint Case No. 1294 of 2017 (Praven Kumar Rastogi vs. Pankaj Agarwal), P.S. Kotwali, District Rampur and the order dated 24.1.2018 passed by Session Judge Rampur in Criminal Revision No. 247 of 2017, Pankaj Agarwal vs. State of U.P.

¶9

Entire case is fraudulent device to terorrise and embarrass the applicant and is outcome of the previous manager of the institution. He in collusion with the complainant after availing interested witnesses has filed the complaint without any basis that is why the list of witnesses has not been appended to the complaint, which was required to be furnished first as per requisite to Section 202 Cr.P.C.

¶10

Learned counsel for the informant retorting to the aforesaid contention claims that Rs. 4,50,000/- have been obtained in the name of earning employment to the complainant and there is evidence to the effect that the money was handed over to the applicant. Rest of the contention cannot be accepted on its face value as the same is absolutely false and denied. No conspiracy was entered into between the complainant and the previous manager of the institution.

¶11

Also heard the learned A.G.A.

¶12

Upon consideration of the submissions raised and upon consideration of the contents brought before this Court by way of filing various annexures, obviously it cannot be said that the rival claims can be scruitinised and adjudicated upon at this juncture in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Therefore the applicant is free to agitate his factual and legal aspect before the court concerned and is

¶13

required to participate in the proceeding of the case and in case, he raises ground of innocence, then the same shall be duly considered by the court below.

¶14

At this stage, no interference is required because the summoning order does not mean that the applicant has been convicted as such and all the claims raised by the complainant have been established but the same needs to the scrutinized by the court below.

¶15

However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that in case the applicants appear before the court concerned within three weeks from today and move application for discharge, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the court concerned in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties.

¶16

For a period of three weeks from today or till disposal of the aforesaid application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶17

It is made clear that in the event no such application is moved within the time prescribed above, this order will be of no avail to the applicants.

¶18

No observation need be made on the merit of the case.

¶19

With the above direction, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of .

¶20

Order Date :- 8.5.2019 S Rawat

Pankaj Agarwal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Agarwal 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

Bhanu Gupta Vs State of U.P.and Another

Smt. Kumkum Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. and 11 Others

Pramod Kumar Mishra Vs State of Up and Another

Sujan @ Sunnu @ Surendra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Arvind Bhargav Vs State of U.P.

Suresh Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another