Disposed

Kumari Renu and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Sept 2019A482/34002/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash complaint proceedings under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, the Court held no prima facie case exists to interfere. The prayer was refused, but applicants were granted 30 days to surrender and apply for bail without coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Application refused; 30-day respite from coercive action granted pending surrender and bail application in court below.

Kumari Renu and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34002 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Kumari Renu And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shubham Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of complaint case no.905 of 2018 under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC pending in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Agra as well as summoning order dated 21.4.2019 passed by the court concerned. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA appearing for the State.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that one F.I.R. had already been lodged on behalf of the applicants' side. Opposite party no.2 moved an application before the concerned police authorities on the same day disclosing the same set of facts. Thereafter, application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was moved by the opposite party no.2 on the basis of same facts, which was treated as complaint and applicants were summoned on the basis of evidence collected thereon. It is further submitted that summoning order was passed without application of judicial mind. Present complaint has been filed as a counter blast with malafide intention on the basis of false facts. The impugned order suffers from illegality and infirmity.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that it is a cross version case. A prima facie case is made out against the applicants. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.

¶9

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 prima-facie 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.

¶10

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.

¶11

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 against the applicants.

¶12

It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicants for surrender before the court concerned.

¶13

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 18.9.2019 / ss

Kumari Renu and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kumari Renu and 4 Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaym Sunder Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramashankar and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ritu Raj Vs State of U.P. and Another

Avadhesh Samadhiya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Prabha and Another Vs State of Up and Another

Gopal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others