In this Section 482 CrPC application to quash proceedings under the Cow Slaughter Act, the High Court held that disputed factual questions precluded in quashing at this stage. The application was refused, and the case was disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 78
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2620 of 2020
Applicant :- Sanavvar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Jeet Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.1353 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No.372 of 2019 under Section 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Saroorpur, District Meerut pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Sardhana, Meerut. Further prayer has been made to stay the proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case.
It is submitted by the learned counsel of the applicant that applicant is on anticipatory bail granted by the Session Judge concerned. No prima facie case is made out against the applicant. Name of the applicant came to surface during the statement of co-accused. Recovery is false. The present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention. Learned counsel for the applicant pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer.
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.
With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 20.1.2020 ss
1 issue framed by the court
Whether Section 482 CrPC affords jurisdiction to quash the charge-sheet and criminal proceedings in this case at the current stage.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶9
R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan LalReferred¶9
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.SharmaReferred¶9
State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful HaqReferred¶9
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sanavvar
State of U.P.
Om Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
