Dismissed

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

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2021A482/14898/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash the cognizance order and charge sheet in a Sessions case under Section 482 Cr.P.C., holding disputed facts could not be adjudicated at this stage. The court granted a decision to dispose of bail applications expeditiously if applicants appear within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

The application was refused; bail applications to be disposed expeditiously if applicants appear within 30 days; no coercive action during this period.

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14898 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Manish And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bhawesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A

¶4

Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicants to quash the cognizance order dated 19.08.2020 and charge sheet dated 19.03.2020 as well as entire proceeding of Sessions Case No. 942/2020 (State Vs. Manish and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0015/2020, under Sections 354, 352, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S.- Derapur, District- Kanpur Dehat pending in the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 13/ Special Judge (POCSO Act, 2012) Kanpur Dehat.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that no offence against the applicants 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 applicants.

¶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 cognizance order, charge sheet as well as entire proceeding in the aforesaid case is hereby refused.

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 4.1.2021 Sharad/-

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish and Another 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.

Kuldeep Pandey 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