Dismissed

Vinod Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC31 May 2022/3318/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge dismissed petition under S. 482 CrPC seeking quashing of charge-sheet and summoning order, finding prima facie case exists. Court disposed of matter directing trial court to expedite bail consideration if petitioner surrenders within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing refused; trial court directed to expedite bail disposal if applicant surrenders within three weeks.

Vinod Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3318 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Har Bansh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for petitioner/applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

In view of the proposed order, notice to opposite party no.2 is dispensed with.

¶7

The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the impugned charge sheet no.02 dated 01.12.2020 filed by police of P.S. Barasagwar, District Unnao in respect of F.I.R No.0105 of 2018, U/S 419, 420, 409 I.P.C, P.S. Barasagwar, District Unnao and summoning order dated 02.02.2021 as contained in Annexures No.1 and 2 to this petition as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.1819 of 2021, State of U.P. Versus Siyadhar and others, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Unnao.

¶8

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. It is further submitted that even if the case of the prosecution is taken on its face value, no offence is made out against the petitioner.

¶9

It is also submitted that the petitioner is ready to participate in the trial by appearing before the trial court but he is having an apprehension that if he moves bail application before the trial court, disposal of the same may take a long time and thus suitable direction be given to the trial court for expeditious disposal of the same.

¶10

Learned AGA, however, controverts the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that this is not a stage where minute and meticulous exercise with regard to the appreciation of evidence may be done and truthfulness of the allegations could only be tested in a criminal trial and, therefore, the petition is misconceived and liable to be dismissed.

¶11

From the perusal of the material on record and looking to the facts of the case at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the petitioner. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq, 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 and Parabatbhai Ahir & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat, AIR 2017 SC 4843 .

¶12

Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for quashing the charge-sheet, summoning order as well as entire proceedings is hereby refused.

¶13

In backdrop of aforesaid decisions and keeping in view the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of with direction to the trial Court that if the petitioner appears and surrenders before the Court below within three weeks from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail may be considered and decided, strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously.

¶14

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶15

Order Date :- 31.5.2022 RBS/-

¶16

Digitally signed by RAM BIR SINGH Date: 2022.06.02 14:30:22 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vinod Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. 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

Humair Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Shiv Prakash Alias Gadde Vs State of Up Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Shiv Bahadur Fourth Bail Vs State of U.P.

Shabbir Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home and Another

Fahd Azeem Vs the Presiding Officer, Addl. Court Room 1 Lucknow and Another

Smt. Shanti Yadav Vs Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No. 1, Lucknow and Another