Dismissed

Gulab Bind and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2020A482/4885/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash a summoning order in a criminal complaint. The Court held that no offence is not disclosed to warrant quashing as disputed facts cannot be adjudicated under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Bail application considered if applicants surrender within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Refusal to quash summoning order; discharge on surrender and bail application filing within 30 days.

Gulab Bind and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 82

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4885 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Gulab Bind And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vidyanand Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 21.9.2019 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Ballia in complaint case no. 22 of 2019, Jhablu @ Sanjeet Vs. Gulab Bind and others, under sections 323, 504, 506, 427, 452 I.P.C. police station Narhi District Ballia.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that 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, 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.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I don't find any ground to quash the summoning order dated 21.9.2019 of the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused

¶10

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 applicants be

¶11

considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. 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 :- 18.2.2020

¶14

Gss

Gulab Bind and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulab Bind and 3 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

Mohd. Abad Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Yatendra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikas Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Wasi Haidar Vs State of U.P. and 21 Ors.

Prem Nath Mishra and Anr. Vs State of Up and Anr.

Nepal Vs State of U.P.