Single judge rejected application for quashing charge sheet and cognizance order. Court held FIR disclosed cognizable offence unsupported victims. No direction issued on bail as Apex Court guidelines apply.
Prayer to quash charge sheet and cognizance order rejected; no direction issued on bail request.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12994 of 2022 Applicant :- Ramesh Darji And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application has been filed for quashing of the charge sheet dated 26.08.2020 and cognizance order dated 20.10.2020 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 20743 of 2020 (State Vs. Ramesh Darji and Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No. 59 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452 and 354 Kha I.P.C., Police Station Narwal, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of learned M.M., Court No.08, Kanpur Nagar.
On perusal of the record, the Court finds that the allegations made in the first information report disclose commission of a cognizable offence and those allegations have found support from the material collected during the course of investigation on the basis whereof the police has laid a charge sheet against the applicants.
As this Court, in exercise of its power under section 482 Cr.P.C., is not required to assess the correctness of the allegation and the reliability of the material collected during the course of investigation, the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the consequential proceeding is rejected.
At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicants and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicants by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the applicants.
As the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021) has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and the statutory provisions governing consideration in grant of bail, no specific direction need be issued by this Court as it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex court.
With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off.
Order Date :- 30.5.2022/Abhishek Singh
Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SINGH Date: 2022.05.31 17:39:54 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether application for quashing of charge sheet and cognizance order under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lies when FIR discloses cognizable offence.
Whether direction need be issued regarding consideration of bail prayer by lower court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherReferred¶8
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramesh Darji And 2 Others
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
