Dismissed

Smt. Kalpana Singh and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2019A482/26191/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court refused to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. citing factual disputes requiring trial admission. However, the court granted a 30-day immunity from coercive measures and directed consideration of bail applications upon surrender within that period.

What did the court decide?

Refusal to quash proceedings; 30-day stay on coercive measures; bail to be considered upon surrender within 30 days.

Smt. Kalpana Singh and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26191 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Kalpana Singh And 3 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Garun Pal Singh,Gyanendra Kumar Gyani,Sudarshan Singh,Surjit Kumar,Vikas Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bhanu Prakash Verma

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 01.05.2018, as well as cognizance order dated 16.07.2018 and the entire proceedings of Case No. 3244 of 2018 (State Vs. Smt. Kalpana Singh and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 07 of 2018, under Sections- 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Sadar Bazar, District- Mathura, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Mathura.

¶8

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is 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. At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.

¶9

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 .

¶10

The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶11

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case 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 Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

¶12

For a period of 30 days, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 7.8.2019 Shivangi

Smt. Kalpana Singh and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kalpana Singh and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Kanhaiyya Lal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and another

Narendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohammad Azam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mata Achal Mishra Vs State of Up and Another

Sunil Taneja Vs State of U.P. and Another

Javed Vs State of U.P. and Another