Partly allowed

Rajendra Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Sept 2019A482/34296/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. regarding a case for damage to public property. The dispute turns on facts subject to a prima facie test. The Court allowed the applicant a 30-day window to apply for recall of warrant or surrender for bail consideration, staying coercive action during that period.

What did the court decide?

Quashing prayer refused. Applicant granted 30 days to apply for recall of warrant or surrender for bail; no coercive action during this period.

Rajendra Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34296 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Rajendra Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Khalid Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the bailablewarrant order dated 15.07.2019 and order dated 22.10.2016 and the entire proceeding pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Meerut pending in pursuance of charge sheet dated 11.06.2015 in Case No. 950 of 2019 (State Vs. Rajendra Sharma) arising out of Case Crime No. 839 of 2014, under section 3/4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Kankarkheda, District Meerut.

¶7

The contention of the 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 purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶8

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.

¶9

The prayer for quashing the order impugned is refused.

¶10

However, it is provided that if the applicant files an application for recalling of the bailable-warrant issued against him within 30 days from today, the said application may be considered and disposed as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law or in case, the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today

¶11

and applies for bail, his 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 applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶12

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off. Order Date :- 27.9.2019 Arti

Rajendra Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Sharma 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

Pramod Verma and 13 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Pappi Katiyar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Layak Singh Vs State of U.P.

Taufiq Qureshi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Krishna Madho @ Krishna Madhav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankit Singh @ Tulsi Vs State of U.P. and Another