Dismissed

Omkar and 02 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC29 Mar 2019A482/9227/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court considered an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings instituted for harassment. The judge found a prima-facie case existed and refused to interfere, emphasising that disputed facts cannot be adjudicated at this stage.

What did the court decide?

The application for quashing the order and setting aside further proceedings was refused, though the trial court was directed to consider bail in light of established case law.

Omkar and 02 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9227 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Omkar And 02 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sarwam Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Saurabh Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sarwam Dwivedi, learned Counsel for applicants and learned AGA for State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for setting aside the order dated 21.4.2018 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Shahjahanpur in Complaint No.5587 of 2017 (Neha Verma @ Anju Verma Vs. Omkar and others), under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur and for staying the further proceeding of the aforesaid case.

¶7

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. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer.

¶9

From the perusal of the material available on record and looking into the facts of the case, it appears that learned Magistrate, after recording the statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. find sufficient ground for proceeding and prima-facie case against accused-applicants, passed summoning order.

¶10

At this stage, 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.

¶11

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

¶12

However, 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.

¶13

In view thereof, application is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 29.3.2019 Vivek Kr.

Omkar and 02 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Omkar and 02 Others v. State of Up 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

Chand Vs State of U.P.

Prashant Mandal Vs State of U.P.

Ram Prasad Turha Vs State of U.P.

faisal Vs state of up and another

Saurya Trading Company Vs Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and 2 Ors.

Sabira Khatoon Vs State of U.P. and Another