Dismissed

Gangaram and Another v. State of Up and Anr.

Allahabad HC1 Nov 2019A482/39236/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, the court held that since a prima facie case was made out, the prayer was refused but bail disposed of expeditiously upon surrender.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash proceedings refused; bail to be considered within 30 days of surrender to lower court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39236 of 2019 Applicant :- Gangaram And Another Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶4

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of complaint case no. 4269 of 20186 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, as well as the summoning order dated 28.10.2017 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Ghaziabad. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA appearing for the State.

¶6

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the complaint was filed on the basis of false facts and also on the basis of malice. It is further submitted that from the version of the complaint as well as statement of witnesses, offence under the aforesaid Sections is not made out against the applicants. General allegations have been made in the complaint. The impugned order suffers from illegality and infirmity.

¶7

On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that applicants have been summoned on the basis of the statements recorded under Sections 200 Cr.P.C. and 202 Cr.P.C.. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.

¶8

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, after perusing the entire record and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order. The impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. The Magistrate dealing with complaint at this stage has to see only prima-facie case and from the material available on record it cannot be said that no prima-facie case is made out against the applicants. Further, to adjudicate/ decide the pleas raised before this Court leading of evidence would be required, which can appropriately be done before the court concerned at the appropriate Stage. Hence, the prayer made in the present application is refused.

¶9

In the last, learned counsel has urged that direction for expeditious disposal of bail application of the applicants be given.

¶10

Hence, it is observed that in case the applicants surrender before the court below and apply for bail within thirty days from today, the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of thirty days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶11

It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicants to surrender before the court concerned.

¶12

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 1.11.2019/safi

Gangaram and Another v. State of Up and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gangaram and Another 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajiv Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anang Pal Vs State of U.P.

Gopal Das Shrangrishi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Madho @ Madhav Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt.Sadhana Samadhiya and 4 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Shiv Shankar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another