Dismissed

Smt. Santosh Kumari @ Guddi Devi and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Jan 2020A482/1103/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Section 482 application to quash charge-sheet and proceedings, the High Court held that disputed facts could not be adjudicated at this stage. Since a prima facie case existed, the prayer was refused. However, the court directed surrender and bail consideration within 30 days and stayed coercive action.

What did the court decide?

The application to quash was refused; applications for surrender within 30 days are permitted with no coercive action during that period.

Smt. Santosh Kumari @ Guddi Devi and 4 Others Vs… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1103 of 2020 Applicant :- Smt. Santosh Kumari @ Guddi Devi And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶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 supplementary charge-sheet, cognizance order dated 3.12.2018 as well as the entire proceedings in Case No. 407 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No. 207 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 333, 353, 427, 34 IPC and 3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Badhpura, District Etawah pending before the Judicial Magistrate-2nd, Etawah and further to stay further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶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 :- 28.1.2020/safi

Smt. Santosh Kumari @ Guddi Devi and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Santosh Kumari @ Guddi Devi and 4 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

Bahadur @ Bahadur Singh Vs State of Up and Another

Mohd Najim Vs State of U.P.and Another

Smt. Malati Devi and Another Vs the State of Up and Another

Surendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chhotu Yadav @ Satendra Yadav (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shahnawaz Vs State of U.P. and Another