The High Court refused to quash a criminal complaint under Section 482 Cr.P.C., finding a prima facie case. However, the court directed surrender and bail consideration within 30 days.
Application to quash dismissed; direction to surrender and apply for bail within 30 days.
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. - 30236 of 2019
Applicant :- Vinod Kumar And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Azad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Babu Tiwari
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. 1062 of 2019 (Brijesh Kumar Advocate Vs. Vinod Kumar and others), under Sections 379, 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station Nakud, District - Saharanpur arising out of summoning order dated 13.6.2019 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Saharanpur. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and the learned AGA appearing for the State.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the complaint was filed on the basis of false facts and also on the basis of malice. It is further submitted that from the version of the complaint as well as statement of witnesses, offence under the aforesaid Sections is not made out against the applicants. General allegations have been made in the complaint. The impugned order suffers from illegality and infirmity.
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 :- 25.9.2019
Sachdeva
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Section 482 Cr.P.C. jurisdiction warrants quashing the proceedings of a criminal complaint given the prima facie case.
Whether the applicants should be directed to apply for bail with a stay of coercive action for a specific period.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vinod Kumar And 7 Others
State Of Up And Another
Om Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
