Disposed

Satish v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC25 May 2022A482/12328/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In quashing the charge sheet, cognizance order, and N.B.W., the court refused the application, holding it involves factual disputes. It directed consideration of bail if the applicant surrenders within two weeks and suspended the N.B.W. pending that.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash refused; N.B.W. kept in abeyance for two weeks upon applicant's surrender for bail consideration.

Satish Vs State of U.P.and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12328 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Satish Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Geetam Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed praying for quashing of charge sheet No. 67 of 2018 dated 09.03.2018, Cognizance Order dated 14.08.2018 and order dated 15.03.2022 whereby learned counsel below issued N.B.W. against the applicant as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 994 of 2020 (State Vs. Satish and Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No. 312 of 2017, under Sections- 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Sikanderpur Vaish, District- Kasganj, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/ Judicial Magistrate/ F.T.C., Kasganj.

¶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. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶8

Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the materials brought on record, it does not appear to be a fit case praying for quashing of impugned order. The prayer praying for quashing of same is hereby refused, at this stage as the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicant involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.

¶9

However, looking at the nature of offence alleged and attending facts and circumstances of the case, as have been brought on record, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within two weeks from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.

¶10

For a period of two weeks from today, the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance.

¶11

The present application stands disposed of .

¶12

Order Date :- 25.5.2022 Abhishek Singh

¶13

Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SINGH Date: 2022.05.27 10:27:03 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satish v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish 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

Jitendra and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Chandra Devi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Sunil Kumar Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nempal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.and 2 Others

Mahendra Kushwaha and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another