Dismissed

Pramjeet Singh and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Dec 2019A482/46071/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An applicant challenged an order under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings alleging matrimonial offences. The Court held that disputed questions of facts could not be adjudicated at this stage and refused the prayer for quashing.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash proceedings refused; direction to consider bail application if applicants surrender within thirty days; no coercive action for thirty days.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46071 of 2019 Applicant :- Pramjeet Singh And 3 Ors Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anubhav Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,B.N.Singh,Manish Kumar Singh

¶2

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶4

This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of impugned order dated 22.06.2018 as well as the entire proceedings in Case No. 28192 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 348 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 324, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Govind Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar pending before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar.

¶5

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.

¶6

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer.

¶7

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.

¶8

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.

¶9

In the last, learned counsel has urged that direction for expeditious disposal of bail application of the applicants be given.

¶10

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.

¶11

It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicants to surrender before the court concerned.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations, the application stands disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 19.12.2019 Sanjeet

Pramjeet Singh and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramjeet Singh and 3 Ors. 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

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

Ashiwani Kumar Sharma and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhinandan Kumar Jain and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Zaved Hasan and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Malti and Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Sarmesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.and Another