Dismissed

Dambar Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2019A482/45192/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The application to quash summoning orders was disposed of. Applications for two applicants were dismissed as not pressed. The prayer for the remaining applicants was refused on prima facie grounds, with a 15-day stay on coercive action pending surrender.

What did the court decide?

Applications for two applicants dismissed as not pressed; prayer for remaining applicants refused; coercive action stayed for 15 days pending surrender.

Dambar Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 45192 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Dambar Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bulandshahr Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Raghuvansh Mishra, learned Counsel for applicants, learned AGA for State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 19.12.2017 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Bulandshahr under Sections 452, 376-D, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. in Complaint Case No. 1256 of 2017, Smt. Saroj Kumari vs. Dambar Singh and others, Case Crime No. 132 of 2014, under Sections 452, 376, 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Aurangabad, District Bulandshahr as well as order dated 8.8.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Bulandshahr in Criminal Revision NO. 426 of 2018.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants states that he does not want to press this application on behalf of applicant nos. 1 and 3 and the same may be dismissed as not pressed.

¶8

Accordingly, application on behalf of applicant nos. 1 and 3 is dismissed as not pressed.

¶9

The contention of the learned counsel for applicants is that no offence against applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. It has further been submitted that in a criminal case, Investigating Officer did not find any offence against the applicants and submitted final report. On the protest, matter was further directed to be investigated and ultimately charge sheet has been filed against the applicant nos. 2 and 3. Later on applicant nos. 2 and 4 have been summoned by trial court vide summoning order dated 19.12.2017 in complaint case. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer.

¶11

From the perusal of the material available on record and

¶12

looking into the facts of the case, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submission made at the Bar relates to the disputed question 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 the Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 S.C.C. (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma, 1992 S.C.C. (Cr.) 192 and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (para-10) 2005 S.C.C. (Cr.) 283.

¶13

I am not inclined to interfere in the matter and prayer is refused.

¶14

However, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 15 days from today and apply for bail, Trial Court is expected, while considering their bail, to bear in mind, established law by Hon'ble Apex Court and the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in Brahm Singh & others Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2016 (7) ADJ 151.

¶15

For a period of 15 days from today or till surrender of applicants, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶16

In view thereof, application is disposed of.

¶17

Order Date :- 7.12.2019 Manoj

Dambar Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dambar Singh and 3 Others 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

Satya Prakash Vs State of Up and 3 Others

Smt. Neha Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dr. Wamiq Baseer Nayeemi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Naresh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anant Pandey and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sahab Singh and 4 Ors. Vs State of Up and Another