Dismissed

Rohit v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2023A482/27277/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Allahabad exercised jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to consider quashing of criminal proceedings. Finding that no offence was disclosed and insufficient facts existed for disposal, the petition was dismissed. Directions were issued for the trial court to consider the bail application expeditiously following Supreme Court guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Rejection of petition for quashing; Directions to trial court for expeditious hearing of bail application.

Rohit Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27277 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rohit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Karmendra Kumar,Amit Kumar Gaur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicant to quash the entire criminal proceedings as well as charge sheet dated 24.6.2021 in Case No. 2101 of 2021 (State Vs Rohit and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 180 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC and Section 3/4 of D. P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, Dsitrict Gautam Buddh Nagar.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment.

¶8

From the perusal of 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. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question 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 . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be, before the court below and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.

¶9

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of case as well as charge sheet is refused.

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that directions may be given to the court below to consider the bail application of the applicant in view of the judgment in the case Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922 .

¶11

In the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra) , the Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the guidelines for deciding of the bail application. For that purpose, the cases have been divided under four categories. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the trial courts and the High Courts will keep in mind the aforesaid guidelines, while considering the bail application. This Court has no doubt, that as and when, the applicant approaches the trial court for bail, same shall be heard and disposed of

¶12

expeditiously by the court below in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra) .

¶13

As such application has no force and is accordingly disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 4.1.2023 RavindraKSingh

¶15

Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rohit v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit 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

Mahendra Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gaurav Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Vinod @ Sonu Vs State of U.P and 2 Others

Mukesh Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amrit @ Kulhadi and Another Vs State of U.P and Another

Mewati Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another