Dismissed

Shubhlal Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2020A482/1429/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed quashing application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed against proceedings for cheating offenses. Held that prima facie case exists barring quashing. Granted 30-day indulgence to avoid coercive action if bail sought promptly.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action to be taken for 30 days if applicant surrenders and applies for bail; otherwise coercive action may be taken.

Shubhlal Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1429 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Shubhlal Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Singh Kaushik,Karuna Nand Tiwari

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of complaint Criminal Case No. 2351 of 2019 (State Vs. Shubhlal Chauhan), arising out of Case Crime No. 69 of 2019, under Sections 419, 420, 406, 504 & 506 I.P.C., police station Kotwali, district Maharajganj, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Maharagjang and summoning order dated 19.10.2019.

¶8

The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He further submits that in the F.I.R. there were nowhere mentioned the date and time of alleged incident and even the date of application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was also not mentioned anywhere in the F.I.R. That IO without collecting the documentary evidence about transaction of money, VISA and ticket, only on the basis of statement of the informant and his nearest co-villager illegally submitted the charge-sheet under abovesaid sections. That from the fact and evidence collected by the IO, no prima facie case under sections 419, 420, 406, 504 & 506 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant.

¶9

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 in exercise of power conferred 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

¶10

and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge according to the provisions prescribed in Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.

¶11

The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.

¶12

However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, then the bail application of the applicant be considered and decided expeditiously in view of the settled law laid by Hon'ble Supreme Court. 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 applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 18.1.2020 Vibha Singh

Shubhlal Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shubhlal Chauhan 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

Vimal Singh @ Rathour @ Chandra Bhusan Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shakeel and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sapna Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Varsha Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others

Yogendra Chaudhary and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another