Partly allowed

Sharad Mishra and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Oct 2019A482/8741/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the plea to quash the charge sheet and summons order filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., holding that disputed facts cannot be adjudicated at this stage. However, the court allowed a 30-day stay on coercive action if the applicants surrender and apply for bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash summons order rejected; stay of coercive action granted for 30 days contingent upon surrender and bail application.

Sharad Mishra and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8741 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Sharad Mishra And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 2.6.2018 as well as the cognizance taking order dated 7.7.2018 in Case No.1238 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No.0093 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. & Section 60/63 of the Excise Act, Police Station Patherwa, District Kushinagar, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Kasia, Kushinagar.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶8

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. 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 Supreme Court in 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 disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶9

The prayer for quashing the summoning order is refused.

¶10

However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail may be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail 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.

¶11

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off.

¶12

Order Date :- 15.10.2019 Dev/-

Sharad Mishra and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharad Mishra and Another 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

Ram Naresh Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Gupta and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satish Kumar Gupta Vs State of Up and Another

Bijendra Singh @ Vijendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Tahir Khan and 03 Others Vs State of Up and 02 Others

Mohd. Tahir Khan and 03 Others Vs State of Up and Another