Disposed

Umesh Alias Dulley and 4 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Sept 2019A482/23872/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash complaint proceedings arising from medical evidence deficiency and illegal summoning order. Court finds prima facie case exists refusing quash but directs court below to consider bail application within 30 days pending surrender.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; direction given for bail consideration within 30 days if applicants surrender.

Umesh Alias Dulley and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23872 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Umesh Alias Dulley And 4 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Mishra 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. 339 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 427 IPC, Police Station Ekdil, District - /etawag arising out of summoning order dated 8.4.2019 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IVth, Etawah. 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

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that summoning order passed in the matter is illegal and passed without applying judicial mind. Complaint was filed showing the same date of offence as disclosed in the FIR lodged on the part of the opposite party no. 2. Referring to the contents of the FIR it is also argued that complaint case is not supported by the medical evidence.

¶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 :- 12.9.2019

¶13

Sachdeva

Umesh Alias Dulley and 4 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Alias Dulley and 4 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Geeta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nazim and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Devi Singh and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kameshwar and Others Vs State of U.P.

Kaushal Kishore and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Indra Pal Singh and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another