Dismissed

Dhiraj Kannaujia @ Dhiraj Kumar Kannaujia v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Sept 2022A482/27444/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court refused the prayer to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order under Section 482 Cr.P.C. due to factual disputes not suitable for adjudication at this stage. However, the applicant was directed to surrender within 30 days to consider bail, with a stay on coercive measures during this period.

What did the court decide?

Quashing refused; applicant allowed to surrender within 30 days for bail consideration; no coercive measures for 30 days.

Dhiraj Kannaujia @ Dhiraj Kumar Kannaujia Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27444 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dhiraj Kannaujia @ Dhiraj Kumar Kannaujia Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Kapoor Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 28.12.2019 registered as Criminal Case No. 11310 of 2020 (State vs. Dhiraj Kannaujia) arising out of Case Crime No. 1116 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi, pending in the Court of C.J.M., Varanasi as well as impugned cognizance order dated 17.8.2020 in above case, with a further prayer to stay the aforesaid proceedings.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicant involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.

¶8

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.

¶9

The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is refused.

¶10

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and

¶11

surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773 and Brahm Singh and others vs. State of UP and others, 2016 (95) ACC 950.

¶12

For a period of 30 days, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 20.9.2022 Kamarjahan

¶15

Digitally signed by KAMARJAHAN ANSARI Date: 2022.09.27 18:49:45 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dhiraj Kannaujia @ Dhiraj Kumar Kannaujia v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhiraj Kannaujia @ Dhiraj Kumar Kannaujia 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

Shanker vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Narendra Kumar Vs State

Sagar (Minor) and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sher Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

State Vs Madan Pal Singh

State of U.P. Vs Rakesh