Dismissed

Abhishek Gupta and 10 Others v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC4 Feb 2020A482/1426/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash charge sheet and proceedings for offences including blowing up and mischief, the High Court declined to interfere. The judge held that the arguments regarding insufficiency of evidence, lack of sanction, and abuse of process should be raised during the trial before the competent court.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 CrPC disposed of with direction to rely on grounds during trial.

Abhishek Gupta and 10 Others Vs State of U.P.and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1426 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Abhishek Gupta And 10 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vikrant Neeraj Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet, cognizance order as well as the entire proceedings in Case No. 830 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 37 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 153-A, 295-A IPC and 6 Sanyukt Prant Vishesh Shakti Adhiniyam, Police Station Gandhi Park, District Aligarh pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Aligarh and further to stay further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶7

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. Cognizance taken in the matter is barred by the provisions of Section 196 CrPC. There was no previous sanction of Central Government or State Government. It is further submitted that though applicants have obtained bail yet continuation of proceeding of aforesaid case against applicants is abuse of process of law for want of sanction. Learned counsel for the applicants pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶8

Learned AGA opposing the prayer submitted that grounds taken in this application may be raised before Court concerned during trial at appropriate stage.

¶9

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that applicants have obtained bail and are participating in the proceeding and have opportunity to raise all pleas, which have been raised before this Court, before the Court concerned at appropriate stage of trial and the Court concerned is enough competent to pass suitable order if the said pleas are found in accordance with law, in my view, no interference is warranted in the matter by this Court.

¶10

With the aforesaid observations, the application stands disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 4.2.2020

¶12

safi

Abhishek Gupta and 10 Others v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Gupta and 10 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Kamil Khan Vs State of U.P.and Another

Sumit Vs State of Up and Another

Shilesh @ Shailesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Fate Mohammad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another