High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings but directed that bail will be considered if applicants surrender within 30 days and no coercive action shall be taken during this period.
Bail to be considered if applicants surrender within 30 days; stay on coercive actions pending such surrender.
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. - 69
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32762 of 2019
Applicant :- Rajveer And 2 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Durga Prasad Tiwari,Vidya Kant Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing/stay the entire criminal proceeding as well as charge sheet No. 526 of 2018, dated 17.09.2018 in Case Crime No. 225 of 2018, under sections 447, 432 IPC & Section 3 of Public Property of Damages Act, Police Station Phase-III, District Gautam Buddh Nagar which was submitted by the Investigating Officer on 17.09.2018 and the cognizance taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddh Nagar was taken on 11.12.2018.
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 purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
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 submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the court concerned is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer
for bail may 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. For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off. Order Date :- 11.9.2019 Arti
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceeding under Sections 447, 432 IPC should be quashed based on malafide intent?
Whether bail eligibility should be determined if applicants surrender within 30 days?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192Referred¶8
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283Referred¶8
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290Relied on¶10
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)Relied on¶10
Rajveer And 2 Ors
State Of Up
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
