Dismissed

Jai Singh and 5 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC3 Mar 2020A482/614/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In inherent powers proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant sought quashing of a charge sheet alleging false implication. The court held that the lack of prima facie case was a disputed fact requiring trial evidence, not admissible at this stage. The application was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing the charge sheet is dismissed. Bail application directed to be disposed of expeditiously by lower court.

Jai Singh and 5 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 614 of 2020 Applicant :- Jai Singh And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rinki Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶4

Order on Recall Application No.1 of 2020

¶5

Heard Ms. Rinki Gupta, learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

Learned counsel for applicants contends that on 21.1.2020 it was requested on behalf of applicants that matter be referred to Mediation Centre, consequent to which they were directed to deposit Rs.20,000/- in two weeks' upon which matter will be sent to Mediation Centre.

¶7

The application for recall of order dated 21.1.2020 has been moved supported with affidavit of applicant no.5 stating that applicants are unable to deposit Rs.20,000/- so the order directing the applicants to deposit above amount and referring the matter to Mediation Centre may be recalled and by recalling the order dated 21.1.2020, the matter may be heard and disposed of.

¶8

Since the applicants have not complied with the order dated 21.1.2020, the interim order giving protection automatically stands vacated and since applicants have pleaded their inability to make deposit of amount under order dated 21.1.2020, the order in this respect stands withdrawn.

¶9

The recall application is disposed of accordingly.

¶10

Order on Memo of Application

¶11

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

¶12

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 9.3.2018, on which the Court has taken cognizance on 6.8.2018, arising out of Case Crime No.096 of 2018, under sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Chhibramau, District Kannoj as well as summoning order dated 6.8.2018 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chhibramau, District Kannoj.

¶13

Learned counsel for applicants that applicants have been falsely implicated; that applicants could not make arrangement of money to be deposited for mediation proceedings; that no offence is made out against applicants.

¶14

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 applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which require evidence and cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court 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, and the applicants has failed to prove any prima facie case.

¶15

In view of discussions made above, I have come to the conclusion that learned counsel for the applicants has failed to show that there is any abuse of process of court or likelihood of miscarriage of justice for prevention of which the exercise of inherent powers by this Court is required. The application is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶16

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly dismissed.

¶17

However, if the applicants appear before the court below and moves application for bail, the same shall be disposed of in accordance with law expeditiously, if possible, on same day.

¶18

Order Date :- 3.3.2020 Tamang

Jai Singh and 5 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Singh and 5 Others v. State of Up 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

Nisar and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Om Prakash and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Alka Agarwal and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Krishna Kumar Sharma Vs Aligarh Development Authority

Pankaj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Arti Vs State of U.P. and Another