Disposed

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

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2021A482/16501/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by applicants to quash police investigations alleging false implicity and malafide intent. The court held that disputed facts require trial and refused quashing but directed bail consideration upon surrender within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing refused. Ten days stayed. Parties directed to surrender for bail consideration within 30 days; coercive action stayed pending surrender.

Satrudhan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16501 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Satrudhan And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Uma Shanker Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the proceeding of Case Crime No.01 of 2019 and Special Case No.23 of 2019 (State Vs. Satrudhan and others), under Sections 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station- Lalauli, DistrictFatehpur initiated in pursuance of the charge sheet dated 29.06.2019.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further argued that no offence is disclosed against the applicants and present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment.

¶8

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 by the learned counsel for the applicants 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 law laid down by the Apex Court in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 . Disputed defence of the applicants cannot be considered at this stage.

¶9

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the court concerned is refused.

¶10

However, considering the nature of the allegations made in the FIR and submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court concerned within 30 days from today and apply for bail, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously by the courts below.

¶11

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, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶12

With the aforesaid directions, this application u/s 482 is disposed of finally.

¶13

Order Date :- 5.1.2021 Ashutosh Pandey

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satrudhan 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

Kuldeep Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Suresh Kora Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

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

Hashnain Vs State of U.P. and Another