Shailendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80170

Court No. - 84

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37557 of 2024

Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 13.08.2024, summoning order dated 09.09.2024, as well as entire proceeding of Case No.7848 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No.88 of 2024 (State vs. Mohan Singh and others), under sections 504, 506, I.P.C., Police Station Gohan, District Jalaun, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Instant FIR has registered under section 376, 452 & 506 I.P.C. & 67 Immoral Traffic Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on perusal of statement of the victim, no offence under alleged section is made out. Applicant has summoned under sections 504 & 506 I.P.C.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the submission raised by applicant's counsel and submits that from perusal of the statement of the victim, prima-facie offence is made out against the applicant and submission raised by learned counsel for the applicant is disputed question of facts, which cannot be decided at this stage.

¶10

The grounds taken in the application reveal that many of them relate to disputed question of fact. This Court is of the view that it is well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is also settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that The impugned criminal proceeding against the applicants is abuse of the process of the Court and is liable to be quashed by this Court.the power under

¶11

Section 482 Cr.P.C. at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sparingly, only in such an appropriate cases, where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceedings or where allegations made in First Information Report or charge-sheet and the materials relied in support of same, on taking their face value and accepting in their entirety do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage.

¶12

In view of the above, in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the matters of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, Manik B. Vs. Kadapala Sreyes Reddy and another, 2023 Live Law (SC) 642, 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, no ground for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case, is made out which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inhe rent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.

¶13

Considered the arguments raised by both the parties.From the record, it is apparent that prima-facie offence is made out against the applicant. No interference is warranted. The present 482 application of applicant- Shailendra Kumar , is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation.

¶14

However, it is directed that applicant shall surrender before the concerned Court below within three weeks from today and in case applies for bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922.

¶15

For the period of three weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶16

Order Date :- 15.5.2025 SKD

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shailendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases