Partly allowed

Vijay Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 May 2019A482/21473/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the application to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 498A and 323 IPC, holding that the existence of an offence was not at the stage to be decided as disputed questions of fact. However, the applicant was granted a 30-day stay on coercive action upon surrender and application for bail.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings refused. Applicant granted 30 days to surrender and apply for bail; no coercive action to be taken during this period.

Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21473 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Lalit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing/stay the entire criminal proceedings as well as charge sheet dated 27.10.2017 alongwith cognizance order dated 03.01.2018 in Criminal Case. No. 89 of 2018 (State Vs. Vijay Kumar Sharma) arising out of Case Crime No. 563 of 2016, under sections 498A, 323 IPC, Police Station Bah, District Agra, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad, Agar, District Agra.

¶7

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 purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶8

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 submission 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 proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the court concerned is refused.

¶10

However, it is provided that if the applicant appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their 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. 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. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶11

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off. Order Date :- 29.5.2019 Arti

Vijay Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar Sharma 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

Ashok Bagi and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Sakeena Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Munni Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajaz Ali and 10 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Waseem and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another