Disposed

Shakil Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2022A482/15705/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to quash proceedings initiated for alleged offences under IPC Sections 323, 504, 506 and 452. The High Court refused to quash the proceedings, observing no abuse of process, yet permitted the applicant to file a discharge application before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings refused; liberty granted to file discharge application in trial court within one month.

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

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15705 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shakil Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjai Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.173 of 2017 (New No.173 of 2018) (Ayub Khan vs. Shakil Khan and others) under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452 IPC, Police Station Aurai, District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the genesis of the crime relates to the civil nature. The FIR has been lodged by the brother of the opposite party no. 2 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 504 and 506 IPC. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case with mala fide intention and with ulterior motive. It is also submitted that prima facie no charge under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 452 IPC, is made out against the applicant and the present prosecution has been instituted with a mala fide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is on bail in this case.

¶8

In the absence of any of the grounds recognized by the Supreme Court which might justify the quashing of charge sheet or the impugned proceedings, the prayer for quashing the same is refused as I do not see any abuse of the courts process either. The court has been vested with sufficient powers to discharge the accused, if for reasons to be recorded it considers the charge to be groundless.

¶9

As requested, the applicant is permitted to appear before the concerned court and move a discharge application within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The concerned court shall decide the discharge application of the applicant on merits, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of three months thereafter.

¶10

With the above observations, this application stands disposed

¶11

of.

¶12

Order Date :- 16.7.2022 Monika

¶13

Digitally signed by MONIKA KESARWANI Date: 2022.07.16 16:22:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shakil Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakil Khan 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

Baby Dhwani Sharma Vs State of U.P.and Another

Islam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Phool Chandra Kushwaha Vs State of U.P and 6 Others

Radhika Devi Vs State of U.P.

Jamal Ahamad and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sambhu Singh Lodhi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another