AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 305 wordsHon''ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi, J.—This Criminal Misc. Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the proceeding of Case Crime No. 697 of 2011 and Case No. 4752 of 2011 under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B I.P.C. PS. Banna Devi, District Aligarh. Heard Learned Counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned Counsel for the applicants submitted that there is allegation of committing forgery by which the sale deed was got executed. Civil suit is already pending. Hence on the application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. the First Information Report was lodged without any reliable materials in support of allegation however, even the charge sheet has been submitted, hence the prayer is to quash the charge sheet as well as the entire proceedings.
Learned A.G.A. submitted that in view of the allegation prima facie commission of offence is disclosed.
Considering the facts and submissions of the cases, nature of the allegation, at this stage it cannot be said that no commission of offence is disclosed. The defence of the applicant has to be considered by the court below at appropriate stage on the basis of evidence adduced by the parties.
However, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, if the applicants appear before the court concerned within three weeks from today and apply for bail, it is expected, that the same shall be considered and disposed off, if possible on the same day, in view of the guide lines by Full Bench decision of High Court in case of Amrawati and another vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR-390 and by the Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others, . With the aforesaid observation this application filed u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed off finally.
