Dismissed

Kuldeep Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2021A482/14814/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate refused to quash the charge sheet, holding that an offence was prima facie made out and disputes are factual. The court directed the trial court to dispose of the bail application expeditiously if approached within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Application for quash refused; direction to move bail application before court below within 30 days for expeditious disposal.

Kuldeep Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14814 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Kuldeep Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Nand Pandey,Sunita Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicant to quash the Charge Sheet dated 17.07.2020 in Case No. 804/2020 (State Vs. Rahul Pandey) arising out of Case Crime No. 85/2020, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 307, 436, 353, 186, 188, 332, 420 I.P.C. & Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Holagarh, District- Prayagraj pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No. 5, Allahabad.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. Charge sheet has been filed on the basis of insufficient evidence.

¶8

From the perusal of material on the record and looking into the matter of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant.

¶9

All the submission relates to the disputed question of fact, which 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.There is no sufficient ground to quash the charge sheet in the aforesaid case.

¶10

The prayer for quashing the charge sheet in the aforesaid

¶11

case is hereby refused.

¶12

At this stage, learned counsel for applicants prays that a direction may be issued to the court below for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the applicant.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has no objection regarding expeditious disposal of bail application.

¶14

In view of the submission made by learned counsel for parties and considering the facts of the case, it is provided that if applicant appears and moves his bail application before the court below concerned within 30 days from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶15

For a period of 30 days from today or till the surrender of the applicant before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, the trial court will be at liberty to take coercive action against the applicant in accordance with law.

¶16

With the aforesaid observation, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.

¶17

Order Date :- 4.1.2021 Sharad/-

Kuldeep Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep Pandey 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

Smt Rukmani and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anurag Shukla and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neeraj and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Manish and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh Kora Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pooran Lal and 13 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another