Subhash and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

Subhash and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer for quashing the entire proceedings refused; application disposed of with direction to the court below to consider and decide the applicants' bail application (upon surrender within 45 days) with a speaking and reasoned order in accordance with Amrawati Vs. State of U.P., Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Hussain Vs. Union of India.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case No.2414 of 2019 (State vs. Subhash and others), arising out of charge sheet dated 1.8.2019 in case crime no.466 of 2018, should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the ground that no offence is disclosed and the case was instituted malafide to harass the applicants. +1 more

Court's answer

On the material on record, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants; all submissions made at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in R.P. Kapur, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.

Key takeaways

The application stands disposed of with the direction that the court below would consider the bail application of the applicants as contemplated in the law laid down in Amrawati Vs. State of U.P. and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.ratio¶11
The bail direction is conditional upon the applicants surrendering before the court below within 45 days.ratio¶11
If the applicants' bail application is filed, the courts below shall adjudicate and decide it with a speaking and reasoned order, strictly in accordance with law, in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Hussain Vs. Union of India.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Shamim Ahmed, J.): Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by Subhash and 8 others seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No.2414 of 2019 (State vs. Subhash and others), arising out of charge sheet dated 1.8.2019 in case crime no.466 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 353, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Hathras Gate, District Hathras, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hathras. Held: on the material on record it could not be said at that stage that no offence was made out against the applicants, and the submissions related to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated upon under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; in view of the law laid down in R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab (AIR 1960 SC 866), State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal (1992 SCC (Cri.) 426), State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma (1992 SCC (Cri.) 192) and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq ((Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283), the prayer for quashing was refused. Counsel for the applicants gave up addressing the Court on merits and prayed only for a time-bound bail direction; the application was disposed of directing that, after the applicants surrender within 45 days, the court below consider their bail application as contemplated in Amrawati Vs. State of U.P. (2004 (57) ALR 290) and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. (2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)), and decide it with a speaking and reasoned order, strictly in accordance with law, in the light of Hussain Vs. Union of India ((2017) 5 SCC 702).

Court No. - 93

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18321 of 2020

Applicant :- Subhash And 8 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred seeking the quashing of entire proceedings of Case No.2414 of 2019 (State vs. Subhash and others) arising out of charge sheet dated 1.8.2019 submitted in case crime no.466 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 353, 504, 506 IPC P.S. Hathras Gate District Hathras pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hathras.

The contention of counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.

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 applicants. 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.

After arguing the case for quite some time at length and pitted against certain observations made by the Court, learned counsel for the applicants himself has given up to address the Court on merits of the case and prayed, that the purpose of his clients would suffice, if a direction may be given to the courts below to decide their bail application within specific time frame.

At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants and after perusal of record, this Court is of the opinion that in the interest of justice, this application stands disposed of with the direction that the court below would consider the bail application of the applicants as contemplated in the law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P., 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC), after the applicants surrender within 45 days from today before the court below and if their bail application is filed, the same shall be adjudicated and decided by the courts below with speaking and reasoned order, strictly in accordance with law, in the light of the judgment given by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hussain and another Vs. Union of India, (2017) 5 SCC 702.

With the aforesaid observations, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 17.12.2020 SP/mt