Dismissed

Radhey Shyam and 11 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Aug 2021A482/9062/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court heard an application for quashing criminal proceedings filed by the applicants under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The AGA argued the matter required evidence, which is beyond Section 482 powers. The applicants conceded this point and withdrew the relief sought.

What did the court decide?

The application stands dismissed as the reliefs prayed for were not entertained.

Radhey Shyam and 11 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9062 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Radhey Shyam And 11 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bhaiya Ram Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Satish Kumar Yadav, holding brief of Sri Bhaiya Ram Maurya, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Sri Pankaj Saxena, learned AGA-I learned AGA for the State-opposite party no.1.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking to quash the entire proceedings initiated against the applicants in pursuance of charge sheet dated 08.09.2018 which is taken cognizance dated 03.10.2019 in Case No. 939 of 2020, State vs. Radhey Shyam and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 276 of 2018, under Sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, P.S. Allau, District Mainpuri, pending in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Mainpuri.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has sought quashing of the proceedings by referring to the factual aspects of the matter and the defence which is sought to be set up on behalf of the applicants.

¶8

Learned AGA-I submits that the contention which is sought to be raised, would require appreciation of evidence and entering into the disputed questions of fact, which is beyond the purview of powers to be exercised under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at this stage of the proceedings.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants has not been able to dispute 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 accordingly not entertained.

¶10

Counsel for the applicants states that the applicants would submit to the jurisdiction of the court below and apply for bail.

¶11

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.

¶12

Subject to the aforesaid observation the application stands dismissed.

¶13

Order Date :- 12.8.2021 Imroz

¶14

(Dr. Y. K. Srivastava, J.)

Radhey Shyam and 11 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radhey Shyam and 11 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

Veerpal Pundir Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Shalini Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Lavlesh Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

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

S.S. Chaudhari Vs State of U.P. and Another