Partly allowed

Babu Ram Yadav v. State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad HC23 Oct 2019A482/20328/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A bench dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of prosecution proceedings. The court held disputed facts precluded adjudication at that stage. An interim direction was issued for a 30-day period to prevent coercive action, pending bail applications or surrender.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action for 30 days from today or until disposal of bail application, whichever is earlier.

Babu Ram Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20328 of 2009

¶3

Applicant :- Babu Ram Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Gupta,Uma Nath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,J.N. Mishra,S.N. Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the order dated 3.3.2009 passed by ACJM,Basti as well as proceedings of Case No. 2038 of 2007(State Vs.Brijendra Nath Mishra), arising out of Case Crime No. 128 of 2002, under Sections 419, 420, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Kalwari, District Basti and the judgement and order datedn15.4.2009 passed by Sessions Judge, Basti in Criminal Revision No.175 of 2009(Babu Ram Yadav Vs. State of U.P.).

¶7

The contention of the 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 purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. It is next contended by learned counsel for the applicant that interim protection was grated by this Court on 17.9.2009.

¶8

All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶9

The prayer for quashing the orders impugned is refused.

¶10

However, it is provided that if the applicant files an application for recalling of the non-bailable-warrant issued against him within 30 days from today, the said application may be considered and disposed as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law or in case, the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail may be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

¶11

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 applicant.

¶12

However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below

¶13

within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶14

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off

¶15

Order Date :- 23.10.2019 IA

Babu Ram Yadav v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Ram Yadav v. State of U.P. and Others

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

Nitin Agrawal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Chandra Kala and Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Sunil @ Sonu Pathak Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Ravindra Kumar Yadav and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another