Dismissed

Vinod and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Oct 2019A482/35619/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings alleging offences under IPC Sections 147, 504, 506, and 323, the court refused the prayer, holding that disputed factual questions cannot be adjudicated at this stage and prima facie offences are made out.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing of entire proceedings refused; direction for expeditious consideration of bail application on surrender.

Vinod and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35619 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Vinod And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vipul Shukla,Radhey Shyam Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.PC has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of case pursuant to impugned charge sheet No. 338 of 2018 dated 14.5.2018, State Vs. Vinod and others, in case crime No. 413 of 2018, under section 147, 504, 506, 323 I.P.C. and section 3(i) (C) SC/ST Act pending in the court of Additional District Judge, IInd Shahjahanpur.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that on 28.3.2018 at about 9.00 p.m., the applicants abused the victim with the name of his caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate him in public view and also assaulted the victim Sachin due to which he suffered injuries on his person.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that victim has not suffered any injury. Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that from the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, no offence is disclosed against the applicants and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention, as such, entire proceedings be quashed.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, entire proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶10

Moreover, all the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CrPC. At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283. The disputed

¶11

defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶12

The prayer for quashing the entire proceedings is therefore refused.

¶13

However, it is directed that if the applicants appear/surrender before the court below and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as expeditiously as possible after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 Cr.PC is finally disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 1.10.2019

¶16

Vinod and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod and 5 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indrapal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikas Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jugul Pandey @ Phauji and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Enamulhaq Alias Salman Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Arjun Gaurh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another