Dismissed

Arun Kumar Yadav and Another v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC2 Jul 2019A482/24055/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The Court held that factual disputes preclude consideration at this stage. However, coercive action was stayed pending surrender for bail within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing dismissed; coercive action stayed pending surrender for bail within 30 days.

Arun Kumar Yadav and Another Vs State of Up and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24055 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Arun Kumar Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Abid Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mohammad Abid Ali, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of charge sheet no 1 of 2018, dated 7.7.2018, registered as Case Crime No. 293 of 2018, under Sections 323, 427 and 504 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Bareilly, as well as cognizance order dated 26.2.2019 and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2025 of 2019.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that police has submitted charge sheet in routine manner. No such occurrence has taken place nor there is any evidence on record., hence charge sheet needs to be quashed. He further submits that if the proceedings are allowed to continue that would amount to abuse of process of law.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing the same.

¶9

Perused the F.I.R.

¶10

As per f.I.R., accused applicants are stated to have beaten and abused the opposite party no. 2. After investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and therefore the statements which has been recorded by the Investigating Officer cannot be scrutinized in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C..

¶11

The arguments made by the learned counsel for the applicant relates to the factual aspect of the matter, which cannot be seen at this stage in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C., as the same would require trial.

¶12

From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in

¶13

proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9 . The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶14

The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.

¶15

However, it is provided that if the applicants 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 applicantd. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 2.7.2019 A.P. Pandey

Arun Kumar Yadav and Another v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar Yadav and Another 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akash Kumar Vs State of Up and Another

Bashir Vs State of Up and Another

Zafroon and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tipu Sultan Vs State of Up and Another

Sheetal Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Pinki Malhotra and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another