Dismissed

Shanker Lal and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 May 2019A482/16239/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses a Section 482 application seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The Court directs the trial court to expedite the trial within six months without unnecessary adjournments and prohibits coercive measures against the applicants during the trial.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; directions issued to expedite trial within six months and ensure presence of applicants.

Shanker Lal and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16239 of 2012

¶3

Applicant :- Shanker Lal And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- S.C. Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri S.C.Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned AGA appearing for the State and also perused the record.

¶6

As per office report dated 8.5.2019 notice to opposite party no.2 has been duly served, but none is present for the opposite party no.2.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the proceedings of Case No.689 of 2011, Om Prakash Vs. Shankar Lal and others, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Chhata, District Mathura pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Chhata, Mathura.

¶8

Submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the criminal prosecution of the applicants on the allegation that they had filed a forged family settlement in the civil suit filed against the defendant in pursuance of a charge sheet submitted in a case registered on the basis of the FIR lodged by a private person clearly barred by Section 195(i)(b) Cr.P.C.

¶9

The prayer for quashing the proceeding of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶10

Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties the court is of the view that the matter pertains to the year 2011 and the proceedings are stayed by this Court vide order dated 10.5.2012, no fruitful purpose would be served if the application remains pending before this Court.

¶11

In view of this, the Judicial Magistrate, Chhata is directed to expedite and conclude the trial of he aforesaid case preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of the order without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties and shall ensure the presence of the applicants as well as opposite party on each and every date fixed by the court.

¶12

However, it is provided that till the conclusion of the trial no coercive measure shall be adopted against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶13

With the above directions, present application is disposed off.

¶14

Order Date :- 9.5.2019 IA

Shanker Lal and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanker Lal and Another 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Abbas Alias Rizwan and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sardar Amarjeet Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Chander Rai and Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

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

Munna Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Others

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P. and Another