Dismissed

Diwakar Chaudhary and Anr. v. State of Up and Anr.

Allahabad HC25 Sept 2019A482/35741/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash summoning orders in a complaint alleging abuse and assault, the court refused the prayer, holding that disputed facts cannot be adjudicated at this stage and a prima facie case exists.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash summoning orders and entire proceedings refused; bail to be considered separately upon surrender.

Diwakar Chaudhary and Anr. Vs State of Up and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35741 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Diwakar Chaudhary And Anr Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Vaibhav Prakash,Arti Prakash Srivastava

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the summoning orders dated 7.5.2019 and 23.7.2019 as well as further proceedings of Complaint Case No. 07 of 2019 (Man Singh Vs. Diwakar Chaudhari and another), under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (Da) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Lalganj, District- Basti, pending in the court of Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Basti.

¶8

As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that on 17.9.2018 at about 5:30 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 him with kicks and fists. On account of assault made by the applicants, the victim has suffered a fracture injury in his finger.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the victim has not suffered any injury. Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, 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.

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

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 defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶13

The prayer for quashing the summoning orders as well as entire proceedings is therefore refused.

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 25.9.2019 KU

Diwakar Chaudhary and Anr. v. State of Up and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Diwakar Chaudhary and Anr. v. State of Up and Anr.

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

Om Prakash Alias Omi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Samoyal Khan @ Bantu Khan Vs State of U.P. and Anothers

Dinesh Pratap Singh and 6 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Ravi Upadhayay Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ved Prakash and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Km. Ritu Darbari @ Ritu and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.