Court refused to quash chargesheet and proceedings under Section 482 CrPC due to existence of disputes on facts. Directed surrender and bail consideration within 30 days with stay on coercive action.
Quash the chargesheet and proceedings refused; directed surrender and bail application within 30 days with stay on coercive action.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43336 of 2019 Applicant :- Smt. Munni And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Khalil Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the chargesheet, cognizance order dated 6.5.2019 as well as the entire proceedings in Case No. 2469 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 956 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 354, 511, 313, 307 and 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Brahmpuri, District Meerut pending before the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut and further to stay the charge sheet.
It is submitted by the learned counsel of the applicants that the FIR has been lodged on false grounds while the applicants have 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 his contention.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer.
I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.
As is evident, 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 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 . From a perusal of the material available on record and keeping in view the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that offences levelled against the applicants are not made out. Hence, prayer made in the application is refused.
In the last, learned counsel has urged that direction for expeditious disposal of bail application of the applicants be given.
Hence, it is observed that in case 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.
It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicants to surrender before the court concerned.
With the aforesaid observations, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019/safi
2 issues framed by the court
Whether proceedings under Sections 498-A IPC and others should be quashed at this stage.
Whether bail applications of the applicants ought to be expeditiously disposed of.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶8
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan LalReferred¶8
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.SharmaReferred¶8
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and anotherReferred¶8
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Munni And 2 Others
Om Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
