Dismissed

Mukesh Kumar Kushwaha v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC22 Oct 2019A482/37315/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought to quash proceedings alleging assault and abuse under IPC and SC/ST Act. The single-judge court held that disputed facts cannot be adjudicated under Section 482 CrPC and refused to quash the proceedings, granting bail only upon surrender and application.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash proceedings refused; bail to be considered on surrender.

Mukesh Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37315 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Kushwaha Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Priyanka Devi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today in Court is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 6.7.2018 and non bailable warrant dated 21.9.2019 as well as further proceedings of Complaint Case No. 68 of 2017 (Jagdish Prasad Verma Vs. Mukesh Kumar Kushwaha), under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (X) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Orai, District- Jalaun, pending in the court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jalaun at Orai.

¶8

As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that on 25.5.2016 at about 12 noon the applicant abused the victim with an intention to humiliate and intimidate him and also assaulted him by lathi, danda and on account of assault made by applicant, victim- Jagdish has suffered injuries on his person and has been medically examined.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of inquiry, no offence is disclosed against the applicant 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 inquiry, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant 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 impugned order as well as entire proceedings is therefore refused.

¶14

However, it is directed that if the applicant appears/surrenders before the court below and applies for bail, his 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 :- 22.10.2019 KU

Mukesh Kumar Kushwaha v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Kumar Kushwaha 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

Mobin Vs State of U.P.

Mahvir Singh @ Fauji Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Siya Ram Vs State of U.P.

Chanchal Kashyap and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanaullah and 5 Others Vs State of Up and Another