Dismissed

Suresh Singh and 5 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC21 Oct 2019A482/37846/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 CrPC application to quash summons and criminal proceedings alleging caste-based harassment and assault, the Single Judge held that disputed factual defenses and evidence regarding injuries could not be adjudicated at that stage. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the Court found a prima facie case existed and refused the quashing prayer, while directing expedient consideration of

What did the court decide?

Refused the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 20.7.2019 and the entire criminal proceedings. Directed that bail shall be considered expeditiously if applicants surrender.

Suresh Singh and 5 Ors. 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. - 37846 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Suresh Singh And 5 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar 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 CrPC has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 20.7.2019 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 14 of 2019 (Ghisiyavan Chamar Vs. Suresh Singh and others), under Sections 323, 504, 427 IPC and 3(1) (Da) 3(1) (Dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Aharaura, District- Mirzapur, pending in the court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Mirzapur.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that on 9.1.2018 at about 11 p.m. the applicants armed with lathi, danda abused the victim with the name of his caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate him and further assaulted the victim due to which victim Ghisiyavan suffered injuries on his person and has been medically examined.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the allegations made in the complaint are absolutely false, fabricated and cooked up. Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the injuries found on the person of the victim are false, fabricated and self inflicted.

¶9

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 inquiry, 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 inquiry, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, entire proceedings cannot be quashed. Further the injuries on the person of the victim cannot be said to be manipulated and self inflicted as the

¶11

evidence is yet to come.

¶12

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 defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶13

The prayer for quashing the summoning order 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 :- 21.10.2019 KU

Suresh Singh and 5 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Singh and 5 Ors. 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

Sultan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ashish Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ravindra Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another

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