Dismissed

Sachin Rathi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2021A482/30857/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. after a mediation report indicated party unwillingness. The Court held disputed facts preclude quashing. However, applicants were directed to surrender for bail consideration.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing dismissed; applicants directed to surrender and apply for bail. File computer generated copy of order.

Sachin Rathi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 81

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30857 of 2017

¶3

Applicant :- Sachin Rathi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahipal Singh,Pavan Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Jitendra Singh holding brief of Shri Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred for quashing the entire proceedings as well as impugned summoning order dated 28.09.2016 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Najibabad, Bijnor in Complaint Case No.1040 of 2016, Ruchi Vs. Sachin Rathi and others, under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Nangal, District Bijnor and impugned order dated 25.08.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Bijnor in Criminal Revision No.379 of 2016 (Suresh Rathi Vs. State of U.P.)

¶7

This Court vide order dated 14.09.2017 referred the matter before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad to decide the same. The proceeding in the Mediation Centre was initiated.

¶8

The Mediator has submitted its report in Annexure E Form 5 dated 12.02.2018 before the Court and submitted "Parties not willing for the mediation. "

¶9

Form 5

¶10

Learned AGA thereafter submitted that the mediation has failed and the parties have not arrived at any positive agreement, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this matter pending before this Court.

¶11

The contention of counsel for the applicants 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.

¶12

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.

¶13

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 for quashing the entire cognizance order and Charge Sheet is refused.

¶14

However, on the request made by the learned counsel for the applicants, the applicants are directed to appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail, the prayer for bail shall be considered expeditiously in accordance with law after hearing the Public Prosecutor.

¶15

With the aforesaid observations, this application is finally disposed of.

¶16

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

¶17

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶18

Order Date :- 15.7.2021 SFH

Sachin Rathi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Rathi 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manu Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Prosenjeet Kumar Vishwas and 5 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mahendra Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Daksha @ Dina Vs State of U.P.

Yaseen Alias Yamin Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chhota Alias Rayis Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others