Dismissed

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

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2020A482/7058/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed for quashing of a charge sheet under Sections 323, 504, 506, and 308 IPC. The court held that the dispute involves facts requiring evidence and dismissed the application, observing no prima facie case was made out to prevent abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of charge sheet was dismissed. Expeditious disposal of bail application directed.

Om Prakash and Anr. Vs State of U.P… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7058 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Om Prakash And Anr Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Chandra Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mukesh Chandra Gupta 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 for quashing the charge sheet dated 04.03.2018 in Case Crime No. 0817 of 2017, under Section 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Malpura, District Agra pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ist, Agra.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants contends that applicants have been falsely implicated in the FIR lodged by the opposite party no.2 and Investigating Officer submitted charge sheet without fair and proper investigation of the case under Section 308 I.P.C. also, which is not mentioned in the FIR and the learned Trial Court has taken cognizance without due application of mind and proceedings of criminal case against the applicants are abuse of process of the Court and are liable to be quashed; that no motive has been assigned to the applicants in the FIR and no specific weapon has been mentioned by eye witnesses; that the impugned charge sheet and proceedings of criminal case against the applicants are liable to be quashed.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that in the incident in question, Ashok has sustained as many as seven injuries including one scalp deep injury over his head and there is eye witness account of the incident.

¶9

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

¶10

and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, and the applicant has failed to prove any prima facie case.

¶11

In view of discussions made above, I have come to the conclusion that learned counsel for the applicant 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.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 20.2.2020 T.S.

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash and Anr. 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

Malkhan Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Kumar Chaurasia and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Balswaroop Sahu Vs State of Up and Another

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

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

Sunil Kumar Sharma Vs Smt. Neeta Sharma and 2 Ors.