Partly allowed

Madhuri and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC31 Oct 2019A482/36565/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused the application to quash criminal proceedings but granted a direction for surrender. The court directed that if applicable applicants surrender within 30 days and file a bail application, the bail prayer will be considered according to law. Coercive actions were stayed conditionally.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing dismissed. Directed to surrender within 30 days for bail consideration; coercive action stayed for 30 days or until bail decision.

Madhuri and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36565 of 2019 Applicant :- Madhuri And Anr Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA - I, for the State.

¶4

This application has been filed under section 482 Cr.PC with a prayer seeking stay/quashing of the entire proceeding of Special Sessions Trial No. 66 of 2018 as well as charge sheet dated 5.10.2017 including cognizance order dated 17.7.2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 393 of 2017, under sections 363,366 IPC and 17/18 POCSO Act, Police StationPathra Bazar, District- Siddharth Nagar, pending in the court of Ist, Addl. Sessions Judge, Siddharth Nagar.

¶5

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants are disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶6

From the perusal of the 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. 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 Cr.PC. At this stage only prime facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.)283 .

¶7

The prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the court concerned is refused.

¶8

However, it is directed, that in case applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail the court below shall consider and decide the bail prayer of applicants in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Smt. Amarawati and another v. State of U.P., reported in 2004 (57)ALR 290, as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, reported in (2009) 3 ADJ 322 (SC). 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 applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶9

With the above directions, present application is disposed off.

¶10

Order Date :- 31.10.2019 ssm

Madhuri and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhuri and Anr. v. State of U.P. 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

Smt. Shahna Begum and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashwani Kumar and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajnish Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Punam Devi Vs State of U.P. and 6 Ors.

Anwar @ Abul Vs State of U.P.

Furkan and 12 Others Vs State of Up and Another