Dismissed

Satyaveer Sharma and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2019A482/22719/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Judge refused to quash proceedings under IPC sections 323, 452, 427, 504, 506 IPC arising from a fire incident, holding no prima-facie case was absent. Court directed surrender and bail consideration within 30 days with no coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash proceedings refused. Direction to surrender and apply for bail within 30 days; no coercive action during this period.

Satyaveer Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22719 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Satyaveer Sharma And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

The present application has been filed by the applicants under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of complaint case no. 2004 of 2018, under Sections 323, 452, 427, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Chandaus, District - Aligarh arising out of summoning order dated 6.5.2019 pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Aligarh. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA appearing for the State.

¶7

Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that complaint was filed with malafide intention due to previous enmity. Applicants have made complaint for damages due to fire caught from electric light against the electricity department and enquiry was conducted. At this juncture learned counsel appearing for the applicants referred to the documents annexed with the application and further argued that summoning order passed in the matter is illegal. Offences levelled against the applicants are not attracted. Concerned Magistrate did not apply juidical mind while passing the summoning order.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that applicants have been summoned on the basis of the statements recorded under Sections 200 Cr.P.C. and 202 Cr.P.C.. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.

¶9

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, after perusing the entire record and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order. The impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. The Magistrate dealing with complaint at this stage has to see only prima-facie case and it cannot be said that no primafacie case is made out against the applicants. Further, the plea raised before this Court would require leading of evidence, which can be raised before the court concerned at the appropriate Stage. Hence, the prayer made in the present application is refused.

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants prays that a direction may be issued to the court below for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the applicants.

¶11

Hence, it is directed that in case the applicants surrender before the court below and apply for bail within 30 days from today the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken/given effect to against the applicants. It is made clear that no further time will be allowed to the applicants for surrender before the court concerned.

¶12

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 2.8.2019

¶13

Sachdeva

Satyaveer Sharma and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyaveer Sharma and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pankaj Solanki and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Shoyeb Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramesh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arvind Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rehan Ahmad and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satish Singh and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another