Dismissed

Shailendra Kumar Siddharth @ Shailendra Kumar v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC8 Apr 2022A482/4384/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the summoning order and proceedings in a cheating case under Section 500 IPC. The court held that adjudicating factual disputes at this stage is beyond the scope of Section 482 and refused the prayer to quash the proceedings as a prima facie offence was made out.

What did the court decide?

The application for quashing the summoning order and proceedings is dismissed.

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

¶1

Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4384 of 2022 Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Siddharth @ Shailendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Srivastava,Alpika Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶3

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 18.02.2021 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahoba in Complaint Case No.2769 of 2020 (Sandeep Pandey Vs. Shailendra Kumar Siddharth and others) under Section 500 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali Mahoba, District Mahoba as well as to quash the proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶4

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants 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.The applicants are already on bail.

¶5

At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants involves adjudication of a factual dispute and appraisal of evidence.

¶6

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 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 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 .

¶7

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

¶8

The application stands dismissed.

¶9

Order Date :- 8.4.2022/S.Ali

¶10

Digitally signed by SHAUKAT ALI Date: 2022.04.11 16:40:54 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shailendra Kumar Siddharth @ Shailendra Kumar v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailendra Kumar Siddharth @ Shailendra Kumar 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

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Subhash Vs State of U.P.and Another

Sonu Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Saroj Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitendra Kumar @ Sohan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Singh Vs State of U.P.