Disposed

Karan Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2019A482/41277/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court refused the prayer to quash proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as it involved disputed facts. However, it directed no coercive action for 45 days and directed bail consideration if the applicant surrenders within that period.

What did the court decide?

No coercive measures against the applicant for 45 days; bail to be considered if applicant surrenders within 45 days.

Karan Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41277 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Karan Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Ashutosh, 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 14th November, 2018, cognizance taking order dated 11th February, 2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 110 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 360 of 2018, under Sections 420, 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Milak, District-Rampur pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rampur.

¶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 applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants appear and 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.

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 3.12.2019 Sushil/-

Karan Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karan Singh 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

Ram Mohan Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Santosh Kumar Vaid Vs State of U.P. and Another

Omendra Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Billu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Santo @ Santo Devi and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.