Single judge rejected quash application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as prima facie case existed under IPC provisions. Court issued 30-day window for surrender and bail consideration without coercive action.
Application for quashing refused; direction issued for bail consideration within 30 days of surrender without coercive action.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27445 of 2019
Applicant :- Ashok And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Chandra Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
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. 3287 of 2017 (Brajesh Yadav Vs. Ashok and others), under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 354-B IPC, Police Station Jagdishpura, District Agra arising out of summoning order dated 21.7.2018 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.7, Agra. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA appearing for the State.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that a complaint was filed on behalf of the applicant side against the opposite party no. 2 and the same is pending. Present complaint was filed in counterblast thereafter with malafide intention. No such incident ever took place.
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.
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.
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.
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.
With the above observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 8.8.2019
Sachdeva
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the complaint under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 354-B IPC requires quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Whether a direction for expeditious disposal of bail application should be issued.
Whether the applicants should be granted a 30-day window to surrender without coercive action.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ashok And 2 Others
State Of Up
Another
Om Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
