Dismissed

Praval Pratap and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2022A482/7407/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This case disposed of a Section 482 application seeking to quash a charge sheet under Sections 498-A and 3 IPC. The court rejected the quash plea as allegations disclosed a cognizable offence. It refused specific bail directions, citing Apex Court guidelines, and disposed of the matter.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash charge sheet and proceedings was rejected; no specific bail directions were issued.

Praval Pratap and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7407 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Praval Pratap And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Shahi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajneesh Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application has been filed for quashing of the charge-sheet No. 675 of 2019, dated 14.12.2018, as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 275 of 2018 (State Vs. Rajender & Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No. 450 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Karhal, District Mainpuri, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mainpuri.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that vide order dated 26.02.2019 the matter was referred to the mediation center of this court but the same was failed.

¶8

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 applicants.

¶9

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.

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex court. With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off. Order Date :- 26.7.2022 Abhishek Singh

¶13

Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SINGH Date: 2022.07.28 10:18:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Praval Pratap and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praval Pratap and 2 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

Matadeen Vs State of U.P. and Another

Malti Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bindu Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Oters

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dudh Nath Saroj and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tej Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another