Dismissed

Ram Bhavan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2023A482/40495/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application under section 482 CrPC filed to quash criminal proceedings arising under the Essential Commodities Act was dismissed. The court held that a prima facie offence was disclosed in the allegations and factual disputes could not be considered at this stage. Bail was permitted.

What did the court decide?

The application for quashment was refused; bail application before the court below was permitted.

Ram Bhavan Vs State of U.P. and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40495 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Bhavan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava 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 entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 1360 of 2013, State Vs. Ram Bhawan and others, arising out of case crime no. 289 of 2003, under section 3/7 of E.C. Act P.S. Chhavani, District Basti pending in the court of A.C.J..M-I, Basti.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the F.I.R. it is alleged that the applicant is Incharge of godown where the foodgrains are kept for public distribution and on the allegation of finding of certain irregularities in storage of the foodgrains, the present F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant under section 3/7 of E.C. Act.

¶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 applicants and the present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment, as such, entire proceeding 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 applicants and as such, entire proceeding can not be quashed.

¶10

From the allegations made in the F.I.R. and the statements of the witnesses recorded during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant.

¶11

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 entire proceeding is refused.

¶12

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.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 5.1.2023 R

¶15

Digitally signed by RAM ASARE MORYA Date: 2023.01.05 17:00:21 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Bhavan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Bhavan 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

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

Sanjay Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramvir @ Ramvir Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aditya Bhushan Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

M/S M.P. Printers (a Unit D.B. Corp. Ltd.) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra Vs State of U.P and Another