Dismissed

Satyendra Yadav and 2 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC12 May 2022A482/10770/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a charge sheet and cognizance order. The court held that disputed facts and the veracity of witness statements could not be adjudicated in such proceedings and that a prima facie case was made out.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing of charge-sheet and cognizance order refused; dismissal of the instant application.

Satyendra Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10770 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Satyendra Yadav And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 28.12.2020 and cognizance order dated 28.10.2021 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.10964 of 2021 (State vs. Satyendra Yadav) arising out of Case Crime no. 868 of 2020 under sections 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Ghazipur and also a prayer is made to stay the proceedings in this case till the disposal of this application.

¶7

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the accused-applicants have been falsely implicated by the opposite party no. 2 and no such occurrence has taken place. If proceedings are allowed to continue that would amount to an abuse of process of court, therefore, charge-sheet needs to be quashed.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the charge sheet.

¶9

After investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer after having recorded statements of witnesses.The veracity of the statement of the witnesses cannot be tested in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. From the evidence on record, it cannot be said that cognizable offence is not made out against the accused-applicant.

¶10

From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. The argument raised by the learned counsel for the applicants is his defence which could not be looked into in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by

¶11

Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604 and State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9 .

¶12

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused and the instant application is dismissed.

¶13

However, if the applicants file bail application, their bail application shall be decided by the trial court considering the law laid-down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Statendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal No. 5191 of 2021).

¶14

Order Date :- 12.5.2022 AU

¶15

Digitally signed by ADEEB UDDIN Date: 2022.05.13 16:39:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satyendra Yadav and 2 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyendra Yadav and 2 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Kumar Yadav @ Guddo and Another Vs State of U.P and Another

Satya Narayan and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Sonu @ Devkinandan Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Murali Dhar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rameshwar Dayal Vs State of U.P and Another