Disposed

Lavdeep Patel and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC31 May 2019A482/22032/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a quashing application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court held that a prima facie offence was made out and refused to quash proceedings. However, it directed a 30-day moratorium on coercive measures if the applicants surrender and apply for bail.

What did the court decide?

Refused quashing of proceedings; directed 30-day moratorium on coercive action if applicants surrender and apply for bail.

Lavdeep Patel and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22032 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Lavdeep Patel And 3 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dev Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 29.01.2019 and cognizance order dated 01.03.2019 in Special Session Trial No.06/2019 (State Vs. Lavdeep Patel and others) arising out of Case Crime No.188 of 2018, under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)(gha) SC/ST Act, P.S. Pahadi, District Chitrakoot, pending in the court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional Session Judge II, Chitrakoot.

¶7

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 causing 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 applicants at this stage. 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. 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 .

¶9

The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶10

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, their prayer for bail shall 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 applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against applicants. However, in case, applicants does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶11

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

¶12

Order Date :- 31.5.2019

¶13

R./

Lavdeep Patel and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lavdeep Patel and 3 Ors. 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

Rajabhaiya Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mo. Ashiq @ Ashik Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikas Tyagi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Lavkush Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Kuldeep Verma and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another