Dismissed

Smt.Poonam Singh v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC8 Feb 2022A482/2294/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a charge sheet and summons. Finding that allegations disclosed a cognizable offence supported by investigation material, the court held quashing was premature. No directions were issued for bail as Apex Court guidelines were sufficient.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash charge sheet and summoning order rejected; no interlocutory order on bail issued as Apex Court guidelines suffice.

Smt.Poonam Singh Vs State of U.P and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2294 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Smt.Poonam Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application has been filed for quashing of the charge sheet No. 133A/2018 proceeding of Criminal Case No. 1137 of 2018 (State Vs. Sandeep and another) and the summoning order dated 3.2.2021 so far as it relates to applicant only arising out of rime No. 123 of 2018, under section 420, 406, 506 IPC, P.S. Phase-II, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶7

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 applicant.

¶8

At 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.

¶9

At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicant and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicant by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶10

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.

¶11

With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off.

¶12

Order Date :- 8.2.2022

¶13

RPD

¶14

Digitally signed by RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI Date: 2022.02.08 17:23:36 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt.Poonam Singh v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Poonam Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Lovely and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sanju @ Nisha Khatoon and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Kundan Pandey @ Sumant @ Chandan Pandey and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Mukesh Kumar Anuragi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Kishore Vs State of U.P.