Disposed

Jay Prakash Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Jan 2020A482/586/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court disposed of a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The court directed the applicant to file a discharge application before the trial court within one month and stayed coercive action against him pending such filing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to file discharge application within one month; stay on coercive action against applicant pending such filing.

Jay Prakash Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 586 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Jay Prakash Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kshitij Chauhan,Dr. C.P. Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard Dr. C.P. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 654 of 2018, Case Crime No. 313 of 2018, under Sections 420, 406, 323, 504, 506 and 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Tundala, District Firozabad, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. F.I.R. has been lodged on account of enmity. It has been further submitted that after investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the accused persons including the applicant, who submitted an application before S.S.P. and D.I.G. concerned, thereupon a further investigation under Section 173(8) was conducted and accused was exonerated but trial court did not accept final report. He further submits that applicant may be permitted to approach before trial court to file a discharge application and suitable direction may be issued in this regard. He further pointed out that the applicant is aged about 73 years. The said fact has been mentioned in paragraph 20 of the accompanying affidavit.

¶8

Learned AGA opposed the prayer of application but he has no objection to second part of prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Upon consideration of rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of with a direction that if applicant moves an application for discharge in person or through his counsel before the trial court within one month from today, his application shall be heard and decided in accordance with law expeditiously as possible.

¶10

For a period of one month or till he moves application, which ever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶11

Order Date :- 7.1.2020 Manoj

Jay Prakash Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jay Prakash Sharma 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Ors.

Amar Singh Vs State of Up and Another

Mh. Rayees Rayeeni Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Badle Singh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Yakoob Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Haneef Kazmi Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others