Partly allowed

Arvind Jatav and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Jan 2020A482/2618/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 CrPC to quash chargesheet dismissed as disputes are facts. Further prayer for bail direction allowed; applicants to surrender and apply for bail within 30 days to avoid coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash dismissed; direction issued to consider bail application on surrender within 30 days; no coercive action for 30 days.

Arvind Jatav and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2618 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Arvind Jatav And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Singh 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 chargesheet as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.4129 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No.702 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148, 427, 341, 336, 436, 511 IPC and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Fatehgarh Kotwali, District Fatehgarh pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad. Further prayer has been made to stay the proceedings of the aforesaid criminal 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. 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.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer.

¶9

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. 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 . The prayer made in the application is refused.

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants prays that a direction may be issued to the court below for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the applicants.

¶11

Hence, it is directed that in case the applicants surrender before the court below and apply for bail within 30 days from today, the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶12

It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicants for surrender before the court concerned.

¶13

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 20.1.2020 ss

Arvind Jatav and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Jatav and 7 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

Rajat Yadav Vs State of Up and Another

Mohammad Ismail Vs State of U.P.and 5 Others

Shankar Lal @ Shankar Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brahmdev Chaudhary and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanavvar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhupendra @ Bholu Vs State of U.P. and Another