Disposed

Smt. Samtlesh @ Santresh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Feb 2020A482/10/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court refused to quash the charge-sheet under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the matter involved disputed facts. However, it directed that the bail application be disposed of within 30 days if applicants surrender, granted a 30-day stay on coercive action, and denied further extension.

What did the court decide?

Directed expeditious disposal of bail if applicants surrender within 30 days; granted 30-day stay on coercive action.

Smt. Samtlesh @ Santresh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Samtlesh @ Santresh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA appearing for the State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the charge sheet as well as proceedings of criminal case no. 2708 of 2019 (Stae Vs. Jay Prakash and others) arising out of crime no. 340 of 2018, under Sections 147, 149, 323, 332, 353, 385, 324, 504, 506 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, district Bijnor pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagina, district Bijnor. Further prayer has been made to stay the proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the FIR has been lodged on false grounds while the applicants had 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 the contention.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer.

¶9

From a perusal of the material available on record and keeping in view of the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that offences levelled against the applicants are not made out. 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 the Hon'ble 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. The prayer made in the application is refused.

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants prays that a direction may be issued to the Court below for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the applicants.

¶11

Hence it is directed that in case the applicants surrender before the court below and applies for bail within 30 days from today the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken/given effect to against the applicants. It is made clear that no further time will be allowed to the applicants for surrender before the court concerned.

¶12

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 6.2.2020

¶13

Sachdeva

Smt. Samtlesh @ Santresh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Samtlesh @ Santresh and 2 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

Sabir Vs State of U.P.

Guddu Vs State of U.P.

Akash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Jiniyas Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Kuldeep Singh Alias Honey Vs State of U.P. and Anr.