Disposed

Renu Jain v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2019A482/40204/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court rejected the prayer to quash the charge sheet and proceedings, noting factual disputes requiring adjudication. However, the applicant granted 45 days to surrender for bail consideration without coercive measures.

What did the court decide?

45 days granted for surrender to apply for bail without coercive measures; quashing of proceedings refused.

Renu Jain Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40204 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Renu Jain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 22.06.2019 and cognizance dated 19.07.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 27763 of 2019 (State Vs. Sudesh Sharma and others), arising out of Case No.669 of 2019, under Sections- 323, 452, 504, 506, 386 I.P.C., Police Station-Kavi Nagar, DistrictGhaziabad, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicant involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.

¶8

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 applicant at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 .

¶9

The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶10

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant appear and

¶11

surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

¶12

For a period of 45 days, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶13

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of .

¶14

Order Date :- 21.11.2019 JK Yadav

Renu Jain v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Renu Jain v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Pappu and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Aakim and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Babu Sahani and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Biraju Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deva @ Raina @ Devdutt Singh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ishaq Mohd Vs State of U.P. and Another