An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a summoning order was dismissed. The applicant's counsel abandoned the prosecution of factual disputes, and the application was not entertained despite the applicant agreeing to seek bail separately. The parties are Lal Bahadur Yadav and the State of U.P.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7235 of 2021 Applicant :- Lal Bahadur Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Chandra,Hriday Narayan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Hriday Narayan Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Ms. Sushma Soni, learned A.G.A appearing for the State-opposite party.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking to quash the summoning order dated 21.01.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Gyanpur, District Bhadohi, whereby the Magistrate has summoned the applicants under Section 420, 504, 506 IPC in Case No. 941 of 2019 (Vinod Kumar Dubey Vs. Lal Bahadur Yadav and others) pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Ist Gyanpur, Bhadohi.
Learned counsel for the applicants has sought quashing of the summoning order by referring to the factual aspects of the matter and trying to point out contradictions in the complaint. He has also sought to refer to the defence which is to be set up on behalf of the applicant.
Learned AGA submits that the aforesaid contention would relate to disputed questions of fact and would require appreciation of evidence, which would be beyond the purview of powers to be exercised under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at this stage of the proceedings.
Learned counsel for the applicant has not disputed the aforesaid legal position and fairly submits that he does not wish to press the reliefs, as prayed for, in the application. The reliefs prayed for in the present application are therefore not entertained.
Counsel for the applicants states that the applicants would submit to the jurisdiction of the court below and seek bail.
In case any such application is moved the court below would be expected to dispose it of in accordance with the settled principles of law.
Subject to the aforesaid observation the application stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 2.9.2021/Pratima
(Dr.Y.K.Srivastava,J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash the summoning order dated 21.01.2021 passed under Section 420, 504, 506 IPC.
Whether an application filed for quashing should be dismissed and bar raising factual contradictions at this stage.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Lal Bahadur Yadav And Another
State of U.P. and Another
Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
