Dismissed

Ved Prakash Mishra and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2021A482/15239/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought quashing of criminal proceedings arising from an offence against a SC/ST. The learned AGA-I submitted that the application involved disputed facts within trial court jurisdiction. The applicants did not contest this submission and requested withdrawal of the Section 482 reliefs, substituting them with a bail application.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not entertained and disposed of as the applicant sought to withdraw the reliefs.

Ved Prakash Mishra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15239 of 2021 Applicant :- Ved Prakash Mishra And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Bahadur Shivhare,Amit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Vijay Bahadur Shivhare, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Pankaj Saxena, learned AGA-I appearing for the State-opposite party.

¶4

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Special Case No.173 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No.006 of 2021, including the chargesheet dated 29.01.2021 as well as summoning order dated 10.03.2021, under sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) (r), 3(1) (s) and 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989, Police Station- Sisolar, District Hamirpur.

¶5

Counsel for the applicants has sought quashing of the proceedings by referring to the factual aspects of the matter and the defence, which is sought to be set up on behalf of the applicants.

¶6

Learned AGA-I points out that the aforesaid contention would relate to disputed questions of fact and would require appreciation of evidence, which would be beyond the scope and purview of the powers and jurisdiction to be exercised under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has not been able to dispute the aforesaid legal position and fairly submits that he does not wish to press the reliefs, as prayed for in the application. The reliefs sought in the present application are therefore not entertained.

¶8

Learned counsel states that the applicants would submit to the jurisdiction of the court below and seek bail.

¶9

Needless to say that in case any such application for bail is moved, the court below would be expected to pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with the settled principles of law.

¶10

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶11

Order Date :- 21.9.2021/Nitendra

¶12

(Dr. Y.K. Srivastava, J.)

Ved Prakash Mishra and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ved Prakash Mishra and 2 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Navihusen and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Bahal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Surendra Kumar Mishra Vs State of Up and 3 Others

Rajaram and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shatrughan Mani Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Srikant Vs State of U.P.