Dismissed

Saurabh Tripathi and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC7 Jan 2020A482/306/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge heard Section 482 Cr.P.C. application to quash FIR and charge sheet in trial court. Court refused quash order as offence was made out but granted temporary stay on coercive action for 30 days pending bail application if applicant surrenders.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action against applicants for 30 days if they appear and apply for bail expeditiously.

Saurabh Tripathi and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 306 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Saurabh Tripathi And 3 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Mukti Nath Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet No. 403 of 2018 dated 28.8.2018 and cognizance order dated 20.12.2018 taking by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahjahanpur in case No. 6282 of 2018 (State Vs. Saurabh Tripathi and others ) pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahjahanpur arising out of case crime No. 344 of 2018, under Sections 509, 506, 384 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur.

¶7

The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that false and frivolous case lodged against the applicants by opposite party No. 2. It is further submitted that earlier opposite party No. 2 lodged the FIR against the applicants under Sections 363, 366 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, in case crime No. 393 of 2017, P.S. Prem Nagar, District Bareilly in which the applicant No. 1 filed Crl. Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court in which the Hon'ble Court stayed the further proceedings. Due to this reason, opposite party No. 2 keep enmity with the applicants and, therefore, implicated them in present proceedings with ulterior motive. No offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶8

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 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,

¶9

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 disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have 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.

¶10

The prayer for quashing the proceedings and charge sheet is refused.

¶11

However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply 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 applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶12

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

¶13

Order Date :- 7.1.2020

¶14

Ankita

Saurabh Tripathi and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh Tripathi and 3 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Ors.

Satvir Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Anil Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikash Kumar Shrivastava Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Rajesh Vs State of Up and 2 Ors.

Billu and 4 Ors. Vs State of Up and Anr.