Disposed

Smt. Saroj Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Nov 2019A482/20953/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Criminal Court rejected a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application seeking quashing of FIR and proceedings due to presence of disputed factual questions. However, the court directed surrender within thirty days for consideration of bail and barred coercive action during this period.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action for thirty days; bail prayer considered if applicants surrender and apply within that period.

Smt. Saroj Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20953 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Saroj Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Mishra,Ramji Singh Patel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,S.S. Sharma,Sanjay Kumar Chau

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, 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 applicants for quashing of the charge sheet dated 5.2.2018 as well as entire proceeding of case No. 1130 of 2018, State Vs. Kamal Bhanu Singh and others, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C. P.S. Naini, District Allahabad arising out of case crime no. 529 of 2017 pending in the court of A.C.J.M., Court No.2, Allahabad.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the F.I.R. it is alleged that on the basis of forged ration card, the applicants had tried to surreptitiously grab the property belonging to O.P. No.2. After making requisite enquiry, the charge sheet has been submitted against the applicants and have been summoned to face trial.

¶8

The contention of counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants 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

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.P.C.

¶10

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 and entire proceeding is refused.

¶11

However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within thirty days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be

¶12

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 thirty days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶14

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 20.11.2019

¶16

Smt. Saroj Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Saroj Singh 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

Sonu @ Charan Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Naresh Kumar @ Mantri and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ibrahim and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rohit and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shankar Lal Kandora and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sri Siddharth and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another