Dismissed

Ganga Das and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2019A482/43204/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha, dismissed the application to quash proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., holding disputed facts were not for the Court. However, it directed bail consideration within 30 days and restrained coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash dismissed. Direction issued for bail consideration upon surrender within 30 days; coercive action stayed for 30 days.

Ganga Das and 3 Ors. Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43204 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ganga Das And 3 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the charge sheet as well as proceedings of criminal case no. 5385 of 2019 (State Vs. Surendra Singh and others), arising out of crime no. 573 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 D. P. Act, Police Station Didauli, district Amroha pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha. Further prayer has been made to stay the proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the FIR has been lodged on false grounds while the applicants had not committed any offence. The police has also submitted charge sheet on the basis of insufficient evidence against the applicants. Essential ingredients to constitute offence are lacking. The present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention. Learned counsel for the applicants pointed out certain documents and statements in support of the contention.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer.

¶9

From a perusal of the material available on record and keeping in view of the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that offences levelled against the applicants are not made out. 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 a prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the 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. The prayer made in the application is refused.

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants prays that a direction may be issued to the Court below for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the applicants.

¶11

Hence it is directed that in case the applicants surrender before the court below and applies for bail within 30 days from today the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken/given effect to against the applicants. It is made clear that no further time will be allowed to the applicants for surrender before the court concerned.

¶12

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 28.11.2019

¶13

Sachdeva

Ganga Das and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganga Das and 3 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

Mahaveer Singh and Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Baboo Ram and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Sangwan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Munni and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Awasthi and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Naveen Prakash Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another