Mahesh Kumar and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 74
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35003 of 2024
Applicant :- Mahesh Kumar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Yadav,Sheo Ram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A. for opposite party No.1-State. In view of order being passed, notice to opposite party No.2 stands dispensed with.
Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging summoning order dated 22nd February, 2024 alongwith proceedings of complaint case No. 63 of 2024 (Ikram Alam Quraishi versus Mahesh Kumar and others) under Sections 323, 406, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Bareilly.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that in the complaint, there is no indication of any date or time as to when the amount of Rs.50,000/- was allegedly entrusted by opposite party No.2 to the applicants. It is submitted that there is also contradiction in the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that even ingredient of Section 323 Cr.P.C. are not m ade out since there was no injury and yet the summoning order has been issued.
However after arguing at some length, learned counsel for applicant submits that liberty may be granted to the applicants to file a discharge application before the court concerned which may be considered.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Mahesh Kumar And 2 Others
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Manish Mathur
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- A482/35003/2024
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court