Dismissed

Nana Saheb Gadey Alias Maratha v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2019A482/17469/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court applied for quashing of a charge-sheet and criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., alleging malafide prosecution. The court held that disputed facts cannot be adjudicated at this stage per established precedents. The application was rejected with a directive for surrender within 45 days for bail consideration.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing dismissed; applicant directed to surrender within 45 days for bail consideration; no coercive action pending surrender.

Nana Saheb Gadey Alias Maratha Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17469 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Nana Saheb Gadey Alias Maratha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bhaskar Bhadra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Dwivedi,Usha Srivastava,Vinod Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing of the impugned charge-sheet dated 17.03.2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.3507 of 2018 (State Vs. Karan and others) arising out of Case Crime No.837 of 2017, under Sections 406, 323, 504, 506, 411, 414 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Bareilly, pending before the learned C.J.M., Bareilly.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that the applicant is said to have assaulted the victim and threatened him for life and the victim somehow rescued himself. It is further alleged that golden chain weighing 179.50 gms. brought from V. V. Jewellers in the name of the first informant has been sold to the applicants by his servant co-accused Karan, which is not being returned.

¶8

The contention of counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present application has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant and as such, charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶10

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 applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶11

At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283 , the prayer for quashing the charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings is refused.

¶12

However, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within forty five days from today and apply for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) .

¶13

For a period of forty five days from today or till the applicant surrenders and applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶14

With the aforesaid directions, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of .

¶15

Order Date :- 6.12.2019 Zafar

Nana Saheb Gadey Alias Maratha v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nana Saheb Gadey Alias Maratha 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

Puneet Kumar Dubey and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Ram Payari and 6 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Amit @ Ahswani and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Rahul and 3 others Vs State of U.P. and another

Arif and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Mahesh Chand and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.