Partly allowed

Mridesh Narayan Yadav and 15 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Sept 2022A482/29196/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This CrPC 482 application seeking quashing of criminal proceedings and chargesheet under various sections of IPC was dismissed as disputed facts were not prima facie clear for quashing. Directions were issued for surrender within 30 days for bail consideration and to stay coercive measures during that period.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash chargesheet dismissed; application to surrender for bail allowed if made within 30 days; coercive measures stayed for 30 days.

Mridesh Narayan Yadav and 15 Others… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29196 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mridesh Narayan Yadav And 15 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Lakshman Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the chargesheet dated 11.10.2021 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.7407/2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 0309 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 452, 427, 325, 323, 504, 506, 308, Police Station Jhagaha, District Gorakhpur, pending before the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) IInd/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gorakhpur, with a further prayer to stay the aforesaid proceedings on the basis of charge-sheet, which was filed after investigation.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the instant first information report was lodged by the informant after nine days of the alleged occurrence dated 14.08.2021 and the distance of police station concerned is only 6 kilometers. He further submits that no plausible explanation has been given about delay in lodging the FIR. In the FIR, it is alleged that 16 persons assaulted opposite party no. 2 and his mother Prabha Devi. He further submits that for the alleged offence, the maximum punishment is only seven years imprisonment.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. submitted that in the present case, the informant and his mother received large number of injuries. The informant Vinay Kumar has also received injuries on his skull bone, therefore, there is no justification in quashing the proceedings of trial Court.

¶9

From the perusal of the material on record as well as statements of witnesses and injured and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants 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

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

However, it is admitted fact that the applicants were not arrested during investigation and case is pending before the Court below, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 22.9.2022 Shafique

¶16

Digitally signed by SAFIKUR RAHAMAN Date: 2022.09.26 11:37:28 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mridesh Narayan Yadav and 15 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mridesh Narayan Yadav and 15 Others 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

Jwala @ Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Mata Ambar Gupta and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Meena Kumari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rudra Tripathi @ Deepu Vs State of U.P. and Another