Partly allowed

Ramesh Chandra and 4 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC9 May 2019A482/18239/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused the application to quash the summoning order under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as disputed facts prevent exercising extraordinary jurisdiction. However, it directed lower courts to decide bail applications within the same day and granted a 60-day stay on coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash refused. Directions issued for expedited bail consideration and 60-day stay from coercive action.

Ramesh Chandra and 4 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18239 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Misra 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 14.02.2017 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad in Complaint Case No. 387 of 2016 (Devendra Vs. Ramesh Chandra and others), under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 452, 307 IPC, Police Station Basai Mohammadpur, District Firozabad pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants contended that applicant no. 1 Ramesh Chandra has lodged First Information Report against opposite party no.2 Devendra Singh and his family members in which after investigation, police has submitted the charge sheet under Section 308 I.P.C. Opposite party no.2 Devendra Singh has filed this complaint in counter blast of the F.I.R. lodged by applicant no.1 Ramesh Chandra maliciously with false allegations only to harass the applicants. Injury of opposite party no.2 Devendra Singh is simple in nature. Even so, the learned Magistrate has summoned the applicants for the offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A., contended that there is no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial court.

¶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

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

¶11

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

¶12

However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants file their bail application, prayer for bail shall be considered and decided on the same day by the Courts below. 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 by the Courts below.

¶13

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.

¶14

With the above directions, this application U/s 482 Cr.P.C., is disposed of . Order Date :- 9.5.2019 AKT

Ramesh Chandra and 4 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Chandra and 4 Others v. State of Up 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

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

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

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