The Court refused to quash the impugned summoning order as an offence remained made out. However, it directed that bail applications be decided on the same day and stayed coercive action for 60 days.
Bail applications to be decided on the same day; coercive action stayed for 60 days; application for quashing disposed of.
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. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16243 of 2019
Applicant :- Ramesh And 04 Others Opposite Party :- State of UP And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Zafeer Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A. G. A. for the State.
This application U/s 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 11.2.2019 passed by 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha as well as proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1678 of 2018 (Ankit Chauhan Vs. Ramesh and others) under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station Amroha Dehat, District Amroha.
Learned counsel for the applicants contended that from the material brought on the record, no offence is disclosed against the applicants. The present prosecution launched against the applicants is wholly mala fide as such, the present proceedings are an abuse of the process of the court.
Learned A.G.A., contended that there is no illegality in the impugned order.
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.
In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the impugned order as well as proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.
However, none of the aforesaid offences against applicants is punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years. All the materials relevant for disposal of bail application is available on record before trial court/court concerned.
In view of order passed by this Court in the case of Smt. Sakeena and others Vs. State, and another reported in 2018 (2) ACR 2190 , it is directed that in case the applicants file their bail application, prayer for bail shall be considered and decided on the same day. If for any reason it is not possible to decide the regular bail application on the same day, then prayer for interim
bail shall be considered and decided on the same day.
For a period of 60 days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them.
However, if the applicant Nos. 2 to 5 apply before the concerned Magistrate to exempt their appearance through counsel under Section 205 Cr.P.C., the same shall be considered by the concerned Magistrate, sympathetically.
It is provided that in case, the applicants claim discharge at appropriate stage, the same shall be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, by the court concerned.
With the above directions, this application U/s 482 Cr.P.C., is disposed of .
Order Date :- 9.5.2019 Jaswant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the prayer under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the summoning order and prosecution proceedings is maintainable.
Whether bail in offences punishable with imprisonment up to seven years should be decided on the same day of filing.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Smt. Sakeena and others Vs. StateRelied on¶12
Smt. Sakeena and others Vs. State, and another reported in 2018 (2) ACR 2190
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramesh and 04 Others
Umesh Chandra Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
