Dismissed

Kamlesh Upadhyay v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Aug 2022A482/18442/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of summons and proceedings in a 406 IPC case, the court rejected the prayer due to absence of recognized grounds but permitted the applicant to move for discharge and stayed coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing refused; applicant permitted to apply for discharge; no coercive action for four months.

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

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18442 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Kamlesh Upadhyay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Shankar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and also perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 13.04.2022 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.352 of 2022 (CNR No.UPJP-040082082022) (State Vs. Kamlesh Upadhyay), arising out of Case Crime No.0080 of 2020, under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Panwara, District Jaunpur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate III, Jaunpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that prima facie no charge under Section 406 IPC, is made out against the applicant. Applicant is a clerk in school. On the application of the informant, applicant has been falsely roped. The present prosecution has been instituted with a mala fide intention for the purpose of causing harassment.

¶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 sufÏcient 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 an application claiming discharge within a period of one month from the date of production of certified

¶10

copy of this order. The concerned court shall decide the application on merits, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of moving discharge application.

¶11

Till four months, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶12

With the above observations, this application stands disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 16.8.2022 Priya

¶14

Digitally signed by PRIYA KUSHWAHA Date: 2022.08.17 10:30:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kamlesh Upadhyay v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlesh Upadhyay 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

Ishwar Alias Ishwardin Vs State of U.P. and Another

Robin Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Anandi Prasad and 2 Other Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shyara Bano and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashutosh Mishra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another