Partly allowed

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2019A482/28266/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of the High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. holding that disputed facts preclude dismissal at this stage. Court directed applicant to move for discharge within one month and stayed coercive action for five months or until discharge decision. Application vacated if no discharge application is filed.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quash of proceedings refused. Stay of coercive action granted for five months or till discharge decision if application filed within one month. Order vacated if no discharge application fil

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28266 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned AGA for the State and also perused the record.

¶6

This application has been filed under section 482 Cr.PC with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 1250 of 2019 (State v. Sanjay Kumar ) in pursuance of Charge Sheet No. 1 of 2019 dated 5.2.2019 (arising out of Case Crime No. 2509 of 2018), Under Sections 15(2), 15(3) of Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and Section 420 IPC, Police Station - Loni, District - Ghaziabad pending in the court of C.J.M. - Ist, Ghaziabad.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶8

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 applicant. 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.PC. At this stage only prime facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.)283 . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶9

Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under section 239 or 227/228 Cr.PC., as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.

¶10

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments made in the present application, the prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case pending before the court concerned is refused.

¶11

However, it is provided that in case, the applicant moves an appropriate application for discharge through counsel before the concerned court below within a period of one month from today, the same shall be considered and disposed off as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, by the concerned court below preferably within a period of four months, thereafter. For a period of five months from today or till the

¶12

disposal of the discharge application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶13

In case no such application is filed within a period of one month from today, as prescribed above, the present order shall stand automatically vacated.

¶14

With the above directions, the present application is finally disposed off.

¶15

Order Date :- 2.8.2019 ssm

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar 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

Hero Vs State of U.P.

Sher Singh @ Shera Nai Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Bajpai Vs State of U.P.

Swatantra Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Subhash Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ramveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.