Dismissed

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

Allahabad HC18 Mar 2021A482/7452/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge considered an application to quash criminal proceedings alleging they were a counter blast. The court found differences in time and place of occurrence between FIRs and that a prima facie case existed. Application dismissed but bail allowed with liberty.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed but liberty granted to move bail application to be decided expeditiously.

Jagmohan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7452 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Jagmohan And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satyawati,Bhupendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1677 of 2020 (State Vs. Jagmohan and others) under sections 323,504,506,452 IPC arising out of case crime no. 0211 of 2019, P.S. Dadon District Aligarh as well as charge sheet dated 17.2.2020 of which cognizance was taken by the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate court no. 5, Aligarh dated 3.12.2020.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the present case is the counter blast case of Case Crime No. 123 of 2019 which was lodged against Kali Charan, Bhoop Singh, Tipu and Manoj in which the occurrence is of the same day. The FIR of the present case was lodged by the informant after 4 months of occurrence.

¶8

Learned AGA opposed the contentions made by learned counsel for the applicants.

¶9

On perusal of both the FIRs it is found that the date of occurrence is the same but the time and place of occurrence in both the FIRs are different. The charge sheet has been filed in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant has failed to show that no case is made out against the applicants in view of the evidence collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation, as such, the present case can not be said to be the counter blast of this case and accordingly this application deserves to be dismissed.

¶10

Lastly, learned counsel for the applicants submits that they will move bail application before the court concerned, that may be decided expeditiously.

¶11

In view of the above, this application is finally disposed of with liberty the applicants to move a bail application before the court concerned. If the applicants move bail application within one month from the date, a copy of this order is produced, the court

¶12

concerned shall consider and decide the same expeditiously.

¶13

Order Date :- 18.3.2021 SKS

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagmohan 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

Shadab Khan Vs State of U.P.

Arvesh Kumar @ Pappu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jagdish Kumar Bind @ Jaggi Vs State of U.P.

Akhilesh Gautam and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Atmaram Rajbhar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others