Dismissed

Suresh and 04 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC30 Jul 2019A482/25232/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash criminal proceedings. The court held that no case was made out to interfere with the summoning order as a prima facie case existed and evidence-based pleas are to be raised in the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash proceedings and stay further proceedings is refused.

Suresh and 04 Others Vs State of Up and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25232 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Suresh And 04 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Shanker Malviya 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. 503/9 of 2017 (Smt. Roopa Vs. Suresh and others), under Sections 452, 323, 504, 354-B IPC, Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad arising out of summoning order dated 6.6.2018 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Moradabad. 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 criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 138 N. I. Act started against the applicants is pending. None of the witnesses examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C. have supported prosecution case. Initially a criminal revision was filed by the opposite party no. 2 herself against the summoning order which was allowed and matter was remanded back. Thereafter present summoning order dated 6.6.2018 was passed and all the applicants were summoned. Referring to the statement of the witnesses it is further argued that no prima facie case is made out. Trial Court as well as revisional court have committed illegality.

¶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

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 30.7.2019 Sachdeva

Suresh and 04 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh and 04 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

Durgesh Nandan @ Durgesh Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Nadeem and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shri Krishna Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Iftekhar Husain Vs State of U.P.and Another

Nabi Sher and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jakir and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another