Disposed

Virendar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Jan 2023A482/38386/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court refused to quash the charge sheet and summoning order. The court held that prima facie offences under Sections 279, 337, and 338 IPC were disclosed, making factual disputes inexcusable. Bail was considered for future application.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed by refusing prayer to quash, but leave granted to apply for bail before lower court.

Virendar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38386 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Virendar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Alauddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 22.3.2022 and summoning order dated 31.8.2022 of case no. 26028 of 2022, arising out of case crime no. 02 of 2022, u/s 279,337, 338 I.P.C. P.S. Dhanghata, District Sant Kabir Nagar pending in the court of C.J.M, Sant Kabir Nagar.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the F.I.R. as well as in the statements of the witnesses recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. it is alleged that on 23.12.2021 at 3.00 p.m. the applicant hit the victim Juli alias Jagriti aged about seven years by his motor cycle, consequent to which, the victim suffered serious injuries and has been medically examined.The applicant is alleged to have been driving the vehicle rashly and negligently endangering life and personal safety of others.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the F.I.R and the material collected during the course of investigation, no offence is disclosed against the applicant and the present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment, as such, charge sheet and summoning order be quashed.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the F.I.R. and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant and as such, the charge sheet and summoning order can not be quashed.

¶10

From the allegations made in the F.I.R. and the

¶11

statements of the witnesses recorded during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant.

¶12

At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283, the prayer for quashing the charge sheet and summoning order is refused.

¶13

However, in case the applicant appears before the court below and applies for bail, his bail application be considered and disposed of in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, this application filed u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 24.1.2023 R

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAM ASARE MORYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Virendar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendar 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

Aman and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arvind Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ratan Chandra Kesharwani Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hakimuddin @ Kallu and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home Department and another

Shailu Pandit and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nijakat and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another