Disposed

Sunny Faujdar and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Jul 2019A482/24017/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court refused the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash summoning orders and proceedings. However, it directed that if applicants surrender within 30 days and apply for bail, their plea will be considered based on specific precedents.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings refused. Bail prayers to be considered upon surrender within 30 days.

Sunny Faujdar and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24017 of 2019 Applicant :- Sunny Faujdar And 2 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶4

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

¶5

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 20.09.2018 and N.B. W. dated 12.03.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 32/2018, under Sections354, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 POSCO Act, Police Station- Shapau, District- Hathras, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Hathras.

¶6

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

¶7

Having heard the learned counsel for the applicants and perused the materials brought on record, it does not appear to be a fit case to quash the impugned order. The prayer to quash the same is hereby refused, at this stage as the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants involve factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.

¶8

However, looking at the nature of offence alleged and attending facts and circumstances of the case, as have been brought on record, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply 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 Supreme Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

¶9

For a period of 30 days from today, the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicants shall be kept in abeyance.

¶10

The present application stands disposed of .

¶11

Order Date :- 1.7.2019/Sweety

Sunny Faujdar and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunny Faujdar and 2 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinod Kumar Pathak and Another Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 4 Others

Jamal Akhtar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chanary Devi and 6 Others Vs Assistant Settlement Officer and 3 Others

Chandrabhushan Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Maha Narayan and 02 Others Vs State of Up and Another

M/S Rikky Sports Private Limited Vs State of U.P. and another