Partly allowed

Abhishek @ Abhishek Mohan and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 May 2019A482/17321/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application, the High Court refused to quash the summoning order and prosecution proceedings for offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC. Noting the non-cognizable and bailable nature of the offences, the Court directed that bail applications be disposed of on the same day and stayed coercive actions for 60 days.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash succeeded on direction regarding bail and stay of coercive proceedings; remaining prayers refused.

Abhishek @ Abhishek Mohan and 3 Others Vs State… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17321 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Abhishek @ Abhishek Mohan And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Hanuman Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A. G. A. for the State.

¶6

This application U/s 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 16.10.2018 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Kayamganj as well as proceedings of Complaint Case No. 654 of 2018 (Dinesh Vs. Abhishek @ Abhishek Mohan and others) under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Kayamganj, District Farrukhabad.

¶7

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.

¶8

Learned A.G.A., contended that there is no illegality in the impugned order.

¶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.

¶10

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the impugned order as well as proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶11

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.

¶12

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

¶13

bail shall be considered and decided on the same day.

¶14

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.

¶15

However, if the applicant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 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.

¶16

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.

¶17

With the above directions, this application U/s 482 Cr.P.C., is disposed of .

¶18

Order Date :- 9.5.2019 Jaswant

Abhishek @ Abhishek Mohan and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek @ Abhishek Mohan and 3 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

Ritesh Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nilay Kumar Pandey and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt.Geeta Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Ramesh and 04 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Badri Prasad and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramesh Chandra and 4 Others Vs State of Up and Another