Partly allowed

Mitthu Lal Alias Mithai Lal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 May 2022A482/11550/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash the charge sheet and summoning order under Section 482 Cr.P.C., holding that disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated at this stage. The applicant was directed to surrender within four weeks for expedited bail consideration.

What did the court decide?

Application refused; applicant directed to surrender within four weeks pending expedited bail disposal.

Mitthu Lal Alias Mithai Lal Vs State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11550 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mitthu Lal Alias Mithai Lal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Ram Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P./opposite party no.1 and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the charge sheet dated 25.04.2020 as well as summoning order dated 15.07.2020 in Case No.3602 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No.17 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420 I.P.C., P.S. Harraiya, District Basti.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment.

¶8

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court 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 Supreme Court in 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, and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.

¶9

In view of the above, the relief as sought by the applicant in the instant application is refused.

¶10

However, considering the aforesaid alternative prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that the applicant shall surrender before the concerned court below within four weeks from today and in case applies for bail, the bail application of the applicant shall be disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law and keeping in view the guidelines as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922.

¶11

With the above observations and directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 17.5.2022 Meenu

¶13

Digitally signed by MEENU SINGH Date: 2022.05.18 17:18:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mitthu Lal Alias Mithai Lal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mitthu Lal Alias Mithai Lal 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

Tariq @ Babli and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil @ Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramveer Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gajendra and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vivek Singh Vs Union of India and Another

Geeta Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another