Dismissed

Atul Kumar Singh @ Atul Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2021A482/6341/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application filed to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 419, 420, 406, and 506 IPC, the single judge dismissed the application, holding that the lower court had applied judicial mind and the matter involved disputed questions of fact unsuitable for summary interference.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings stands dismissed.

Atul Kumar Singh @ Atul Singh and 3 Others Vs… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6341 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Atul Kumar Singh @ Atul Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Chandel,Mayank Krishna S Chandel,Ram Niwas Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 13266 of 2020 under Sections 419,420, 406, 506 I.P.C. arising out of Case No. 317 of 2020 P.S.- Sigra, District- Varanasi, charge sheet dated 09.09.2020 and cognizance taken on 22.09.2020 pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi may kept in abeyance with an alternative prayer to stay the further proceedings of the above mentioned case.

¶7

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that prima facie cognizable case is made out against the applicant. All the submission made at the Bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CR.P.C.

¶8

I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA. and have gone through the materials available on record carefully and I do not find any substance in the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the applicant.

¶9

The impugned order reflects application of judicial mind. No interference is required by this Court.

¶10

Needless to state that in the eventuality of surrendering and moving bail application by the applicant before competent Court of Jurisdiction, the Court below shall decide the same as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, considering all aspects of the matter.

¶11

However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the competent Court below is to act, in accordance with law.

¶12

This application stands disposed off accordingly.

¶13

Order Date :- 5.8.2021//Fhd.

Atul Kumar Singh @ Atul Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul Kumar Singh @ Atul Singh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Alias Salman Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Sandeep Kol Vs State of Up and Another

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Ashraf Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another