Dismissed

Viddhya Shanker @ Bhagat Upadhayay v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Nov 2019A482/7267/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court refused the application to quash the charge-sheet and related proceedings filed against the applicant for alleged atrocities and obstruction. It held that disputed questions of fact could not be adjudicated at this stage and the content of Section 482 CrPC for quashing is prima facie based.

What did the court decide?

Charge-sheet and entire proceedings refused to be quashed; applicant directed to surrender and apply for bail separately.

Viddhya Shanker @ Bhagat Upadhayay Vs State of U.P. and… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7267 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Viddhya Shanker @ Bhagat Upadhayay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ishan Deo Giri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the Charge-sheet No.08 of 2017 dated 13.03.2017 as well as the entire proceedings of Special Case No.10 of 2018 (State Vs. Viddhya Shanker @ Bhagat Upadhayay) arising out of Case Crime No.28 of 2017, under Sections 353, 504, 506, 427, 323, 452 IPC and under Section 3(1)(Da) & 3(2) (Dha), 3(2) 5 Ka of SC/ST Act, Police Station Ahraula, District Azamgarh, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that on 11.01.2017, the applicant along with other co-accused persons reached at the fair price shop of the Opposite Party No.2 and obstructed the distribution of the food-grains and on being asked to refrain from their illegal acts, the applicant abused the victim with the name of his caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate him in public view.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, no offence is disclosed against the applicant and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant and as such, charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶10

Moreover, all the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CrPC. At this stage, only prima

¶11

facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶12

The prayer for quashing the charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings is therefore refused.

¶13

However, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as expeditiously as possible after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 27.11.2019 Zafar

Viddhya Shanker @ Bhagat Upadhayay v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Viddhya Shanker @ Bhagat Upadhayay 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

Shri Kishan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Mathur Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shrawan Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Kumar Pathak Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rochit Jain and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another