Partly allowed

Lavkush Bhatnagar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 May 2019A482/19200/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant filed an application under Section 482 Cr.PC to quash criminal proceedings alleging harassment. The court held that no offence was made out and disapproved the quashing of proceedings. It directed a 30-day grace period for appearance and bail consideration before coercive action could be taken., refusing quash yet staying coercive measures temporarily.

What did the court decide?

Prayers for quashing dismissed; coercive action stayed for 30 days pending appearance and bail application at court below.

Lavkush Bhatnagar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19200 of 2019 Applicant :- Lavkush Bhatnagar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Mohit Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhinav Prasad learned AGA for the State.

¶4

This application has been filed under section 482 Cr.PC with prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1858 if 2018 (State v. Lavkush) arising out of Case Crime No. 712 if 2016, under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Chandausi, District- Sambhal pending in the court of CJM, Smabhal at Chandausi and also to quash the impugned charge sheet No. 38 of 2017 dated 8.2.2017 and also cognizance order dated 20.7.2017 and also to quash the non-bailable warrants issued against the applicant vide order dated 8.10.2018.

¶5

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant 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 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.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 him/them.

¶9

With the above directions, present application is disposed of.

¶10

Order Date :- 14.5.2019/ssm

Lavkush Bhatnagar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lavkush Bhatnagar 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

Surendra Kumar Srivastava and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Km. Maharani Vs State of U.P. and Others

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

Pawan Kumar Mishra and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Umesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another