Dismissed

Lakhpat and 5 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC28 Jul 2022A482/10616/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court refused to quash the charge sheet in a criminal case involving a fight where injuries were sustained by both sides. The court held that no interference was required as the incident was admitted by both parties, though bail was allowed if applied for within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashment refused. No coercive action for 4 weeks if bail application filed; otherwise order void.

Lakhpat and 5 Others Vs State of U.P and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10616 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Lakhpat And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijai Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Dwivedi

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

By way of the instant applicant, the applicants have sought for quashment of the charge sheet no.1, dated 09.07.2021 as well as summoning order dated 29.10.2021 and the entire proceeding in Case No.852 of 2021 State Vs. Lakhpat and others, arising out of Case Crime No.103 of 2021 under Sections 34, 147, 323, 504, 506, 352, 452, 325 I.P.C., Police Station Bhutta, District Bareilly, pending in the court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Bareilly.

¶7

Contention, in brief, is that both the sides lodged their respective first information reports. Claim of the applicants' side is that no doubt, the incident has taken place wherein the opposite party no.2 was aggressor and this aspect of the case was not properly taken into account and the investigation was done by the police and the charge sheet was filed against the applicants.

¶8

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has opposed the prayer for quashment of the charge sheet both on the factual and legal aspects and claimed that the incident is admitted to both the sides. The factual determination of the situation about the actual facts existing on the point would be subject matter of the scrutiny properly done by the court below concerned.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has adopted the contention of the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

¶10

Upon perusal of the averments made in the accompanying afÏdavit and upon consideration of document annexed therewith, obviously the incident is admitted to both the sides, they lodged their respective first information reports regarding the alleged incident wherein both the sides sustained injuries. No doubt, one person suffered casualty from the side of the applicants. At this juncture, no interference is required by this Court. Therefore, the prayer of quashment of the impugned order and proceeding is refused.

¶11

However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that in case the applicants appear before the court concerned within four weeks from today and move application for bail, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the court concerned as expeditiously as possible.

¶12

For a period of four weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶13

It is made clear that in the event no such application is moved within the time prescribed above, this order will be of no avail to the applicants.

¶14

With the above direction, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 28.7.2022 rkg

¶16

Digitally signed by RAKESH KUMAR GAUTAM Date: 2022.07.30 12:13:18 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lakhpat and 5 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhpat and 5 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shankar Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Om Prakash and Another Vs State of Up and 2 Others

Abhishek and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rolu Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra Prasad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitendra @ Jitendra Singh Vs State of U.P and 3 Others