Partly allowed

Smt. Premvati v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC20 Sept 2022A482/13897/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC challenging proceedings under the Essential Commodities Act, the single judge refused to quash the case. The court directed the applicant to move a discharge application within 15 days for expedited disposal by the trial court within one month.

What did the court decide?

Quashing refused; conditional directions issued for expedited disposal of a discharge application within 15 days including request for exemption from appearance.

Smt. Premvati Vs State of U.P.and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13897 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Premvati Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pravesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present petition has been filed for quashing entire criminal proceedings and charge sheet dated 16.12.2021 in case crime No.118 of 2021 under sections 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, P.S. Ratanpuri, district Muzaffar Nagar, pending in the court of ACJM, Muzaffar Nagar.

¶7

The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶8

The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.

¶9

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments made in the present petition, the prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case is refused.

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant may be permitted to move an application for discharge and the same may be decided by the trial court in a time bound manner.

¶11

However, it is provided that in case, the applicants move an appropriate application for discharge before the concerned Court below within a period of fifteen days from today, the

¶12

same shall be considered and disposed off as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, by the concerned Court below preferably within a period of one month thereafter.

¶13

The petitioner shall be at liberty to move an application under section 205 CrPC for exemption of appearance along with the discharge application. In case such application for exemption is filed, the same shall be considered prior to taking up discharge application.

¶14

In case no such application is filed within a period of fifteen days from today, as prescribed above, the benefit of present order shall not be available to the applicants.

¶15

With the aforesaid directions, this petition is finally disposed of.

¶16

Order Date :- 20.9.2022 kkb.

¶17

Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL Date: 2022.09.20 17:21:30 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Premvati v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Premvati 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

Salman and Another Vs State of Up and Another

Mohammad Meraj and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anand Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kishanpal Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Arif and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another