Dismissed

Veerpal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Jan 2020A482/173/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge dismissed the application to quash a summoning order. Finding prima facie evidence sufficient, the Court rejected the claim of false accusation but granted a 30-day grace period for surrender and bail consideration to avoid coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; applicant granted 30 days to surrender and apply for bail without coercive action.

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

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 173 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Veerpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Karunesh Narayan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. representing the State. Perused the records.

¶6

The applicant, Veerpal, by means of this application, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court, with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 16.11.2019, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Baheri, Bareilly, in complaint case No. 56 of 2019, under Sections 420, 120B of IPC Police Station- Baheri, District Bareilly, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Baheri, Bareilly.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that it was false accusation, under misuse of process of law. No occurrence ever took place. Even then summoning order has been passed. Hence, this application with above prayer.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application by contending that 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.

¶9

From the very perusal of complaint, it is apparent that it is filed by Mahendra Pal against Veerpal and others. The contention was that Vijaypal and Veerpal, with intention of fraud, came to the house of complainant Mahendra Pal and made persuasion about double of deposit within 5 years, in Wallgreen Sales and Marketing Private Ltd. Company. As there was no money with complainant, he shows his inability. They persuaded the complainant for selling land thereby the value will be doubled in 5 years. Under this enticement, sale deed was got executed on 27.04.2016. It was with no consequences, rather, bonds were given in tune of two bonds of Rs. 50,000/- and two bonds of Rs.25,000/-, amounting Rs. 1,50,000/-, but after its maturity, it was not paid. Subsequently, fraud was detected. Hence, this complaint.

¶10

This fact has been narrated by the complainant, in his statement recorded under Section 200 and his witnesses recorded under

¶11

Section 202 of Cr.P.C. Prima facie, there was sufficient evidence for passing of summoning order. Hence, this application for above prayed relief, is of no force. Accordingly, it merits its dismissal.

¶12

Dismissed, as such.

¶13

However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within thirty (30) days from today and applies for bail, then the bail application of the applicant be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

¶14

For a period of thirty (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.

¶15

However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below, within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶16

With the aforesaid directions, this application stands dismissed accordingly.

¶17

Order Date :- 10.1.2020 S.K.

Veerpal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veerpal 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

Gajendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay @ Sanju and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sultan Kushwaha and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Umesh Yadav and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Rita Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

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