Dismissed

Vijay Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Nov 2024A482/19773/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings for assault and intimidation, the court refused the prayer as adjudication of facts fell within the trial court's jurisdiction. However, an interim direction was issued preventing coercive action for three weeks pending bail consideration.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action for three weeks if applicants surrender; bail application to be considered expeditiously.

Vijay Singh and Others vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:174682

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19773 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vijay Singh And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Balbeer Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 02.03.2024, of Complaint Case No. 17 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Fatehpur Sikri, District Agra, pending in the court of A.C.J.M., Court no. 7, Agra.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the impugned complaint has been filed making false and baseless allegations. Earlier the complainant has lodged a first information report on 25.05.2020 against the applicants for the offence under Sections 147, 342, 323, 506 IPC and in that matter applicants are on bail and it appears that the complainant was not satisfied with the said case and thus, impugned complaint has been filed by showing a false incident. Learned counsel has referred the statements of complainant, recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., and of witnesses, recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C., and submitted that in the incident, no one has sustained any injury and the impugned complaint has been filed with mala fide intention and thus, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in view of the allegations made in the complaint and in the statement of complainant, recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., as well as in the statements of witnesses, recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C., a prima facie case is made out against the applicants.

¶10

The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and material on record even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. In well celebrated judgment reported in AIR 1992 SC 605 State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal, Supreme Court has carved out certain guidelines, wherein FIR or proceedings may be quashed but cautioned that the power to quash FIR or proceedings should be exercised sparingly and that too in the rarest of rare cases.

¶11

In the instant matter perusal of record shows that the complainant has alleged that he has lodged a first information report on 25.05.2020 regarding an incident of assault and that on 10.09.2020 applicants have trespassed into the house of complainant and assaulted him and his family members in order to pressurize them to compromise in the case lodged by the complainant earlier. The complainant has supported this version in his statement, recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. The version of complainant is further supported by witnesses, examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C. The submissions raised by learned counsel for

¶12

the applicants call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court and even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶13

After considering arguments raised by learned counsel for parties and perusing the impugned complaint and the materials in support of the same, this Court does not find it to be a case which can be determined or gone into in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly the prayer for quashing the impugned complaint and summoning order is hereby refused.

¶14

However, it is directed that in case, applicants appear/surrender before the trial court concerned within a period of three weeks from today and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with settled law. For a period of three weeks from today or till the applicants appear/surrender before the court concerned, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid complaint case.

¶15

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of in above terms.

¶16

Order Date :- 7.11.2024 Anand

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ANAND VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vijay Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Singh and 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

Kuldeep and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd Maishan Ali vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Manish Singh @ Anurooddh Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mukesh and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Mamta Kumari vs State of U.P. and Another

Shrikant Prasad and Others vs State of U.P. and Another