Dismissed

Smt.Geeta Devi and Another v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC8 May 2019A482/33550/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings was rejected as it involved disputed facts. However, the Court directed that any bail application be decided on the same day, no coercive action be taken for 60 days, and discharge applications be heard via speaking order.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash proceedings refused; directions given for expeditious bail and discharge proceedings; coercive action stayed for 60 days.

Smt.Geeta Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33550 of 2016

¶3

Applicant :- Smt.Geeta Devi And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kishore,Anand Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shri Prakash Dwivedi

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for the complainant/informant and learned A. G. A. for the State.

¶6

This application U/s 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 17.12.2015 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 510 of 2016 (Rajpati Pandey Vs. Rahul and another), under Sections 323, 325, 452 IPC, Police Station Kachhawa, District Mirzapur pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division/Fast Track Court), District-Mirzapur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants contended that applicants and opposite party no.2 are residing in the same house. In the X-ray report of the victim, it is mentioned that no fresh bony injury is seen. Accordingly, offence under Sections 452, 325 I.P.C. is not made out.

¶8

Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A., contended that there is no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial court.

¶9

From the perusal of the complaint and 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.

¶10

All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶11

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the impugned order as well as proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶12

However, none of the aforesaid offences against applicants is punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years. All the materials relevant for disposal of bail application is available on record before trial court/court concerned.

¶13

In view of order passed by this Court in the case of Smt. Sakeena and others Vs. State, and another reported in 2018 (2) ACR 2190 , it is directed that in case the applicants file their bail application, prayer for bail shall be considered and decided on the same day. If for any reason it is not possible to decide the regular bail application on the same day, then prayer for interim bail shall be considered and decided on the same day.

¶14

For a period of 60 days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶15

If the applicants apply for discharge at appropriate stage, the same shall be decided by the trial court by speaking order.

¶16

With the above directions, this application U/s 482 Cr.P.C., is disposed of . Order Date :- 8.5.2019 AKT

Smt.Geeta Devi and Another v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Geeta Devi and Another v. State of U.P.and Another

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

Smt. Dhupa Devi and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhan Singh Vs State of Up and 2 Others

Jagannath Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ritesh Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nilay Kumar Pandey and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ganesh and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another