Dismissed

Masooq and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2021A482/12599/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Court No. 88, Allahabad rejected an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a charge-sheet and further proceedings. The court held that disputed questions of fact preclude quashing at this stage, relying on apex court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing of charge-sheet dated 24.12.2019 and further proceedings in Case No. 277 of 2021 dismissed.

Masooq and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 88 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12599 of 2021 Applicant :- Masooq And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Firoz Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Mohammad Firoz Khan, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶4

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of charge-sheet dated 24.12.2019 as well as further proceedings of Case No. 277 of 2021 (State vs.Masooq and others) arising out of Case Crime No.569 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kareli, District Prayagraj pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate IV, Allahabad.

¶5

The contention of counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.

¶6

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 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.

¶7

At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283, the prayer sought as aforesaid is refused.

¶8

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of record, this Court is of the opinion that no case for quashing of charge sheet as well as further proceedings is made out.

¶9

Accordingly, the instant application is dismissed .

¶10

Order Date :- 18.8.2021/Tamang

Masooq and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Masooq 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

Ashiq Ansari Vs State of Up and Another

Rajpal Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Om Prakash and 13 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Prasad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Prakash @ Ram Prakash Chaudhari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Km. Kusama and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others