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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash the chargesheet and proceedings refused; however, on surrender and application for bail within thirty days the bail application is to be considered and decided in view of the settled law, with no coercive action against the applicants for thirty days and no further time allowed for surrender.

Issue for consideration

Whether the chargesheet and the entire proceedings in Case No. 7388 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 173 of 2019, under Sections 452, 323, 504 and 506 IPC pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Etah, ought to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC. +1 more

Court's answer

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.; at this stage only a prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court.

Ratio / Principle

On a perusal of the material available on record, it cannot be said that the offences levelled against the applicants are not made out; hence the prayer made in the application is refused.

Key takeaways

If the applicants surrender before the court below and apply for bail within thirty days, the bail application shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law; for a period of thirty days no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.ratio¶¶10
No further time beyond the stated period shall be allowed to the applicants to surrender before the court concerned.ratio¶¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Section 482 CrPC — quashing of chargesheet and entire proceedings in Case No. 7388 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 173 of 2019, under Sections 452, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Sakeet, District Etah, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Etah — held, submissions of false implication, insufficient evidence and mala fides raise disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated 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 in R.P. Kapur, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical; on the material on record it cannot be said the offences are not made out; quashing prayer refused — applicants permitted to surrender and apply for bail within thirty days, bail to be considered and decided in view of settled law, no coercive action for thirty days, and no further time for surrender — application disposed of.

Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 45468 of 2019 Applicant :- Ramesh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Narayan Singh(Kushwaha) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants 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 chargesheet as well as the entire proceedings in Case No. 7388 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 173 of 2019, under Sections 452, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Sakeet, District Etah pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Etah and further to stay further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

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.

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer.

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.

As is evident, 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 . 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. Hence, prayer made in the application is refused.

In the last, learned counsel has urged that direction for expeditious disposal of bail application of the applicants be given.

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

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

With the aforesaid observations, the application stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 3.1.2020/safi