Partly allowed

Narendra Middha and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 May 2019A482/18895/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court refused application under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings alleging 498A IPC, holding it was a factual dispute. Court granted 30-day moratorium on coercive action contingent upon applicants surrendering and applying for bail.

What did the court decide?

Granted 30-day moratorium on coercive action provided applicants surrender and apply for bail within that period; quashing refused.

Narendra Middha and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18895 of 2019 Applicant :- Narendra Middha And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Abhinav Prasad learned AGA for the State.

¶4

This application has been filed under section 482 Cr.PC with a prayer to stay/quash/set aside the entire proceedings of the Case No 669 of 2019 (State v. Narendra Middha and another) under sections 498A, 406 IPC, Police Station- Vijay Nagar, District- Ghazaibad, arising out of Charge sheet No. 01 of 2019, dated 3.3.2019 filed in Case Crime No. 811 of 2017, pending before the court of ACJM, Court No.2. Ghaziabad.

¶5

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶6

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. 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.PC. At this stage only prime facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.)283 .

¶7

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the court concerned is refused.

¶8

However, it is directed, that in case applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail the court below shall consider and decide the bail prayer of applicants in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Smt. Amarawati and another v. State of U.P., reported in 2004 (57)ALR 290, as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, reported in (2009) 3 ADJ 322 (SC). For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶9

With the above directions, present application is disposed of.

¶10

Order Date :- 10.5.2019 ssm

Narendra Middha and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra Middha 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

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

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

Munna Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Others

Gaurav Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gopal Upadhyay and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Manish Mehta and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another