High CourtsSingle Bench

Ram Raja and Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 17 April 2014 · Citation: (2014) 04 AHC CK 0118

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vipin Sinha, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 227, 228, 239, 482 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 323, 452, 504, 506 · Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 227, 228, 239, 482 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 323, 452, 504, 506 · Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 227, 228, 239, 482 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 323, 452, 504, 506
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Application U/S. 482 No. 10169 of 2014
Ask AI about this case

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

8 paragraphs · 455 words

Vipin Sinha, J.—Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2.

The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 562 of 2013, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.-Kailiya, District Jalaun pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate/Additional Civil Judge (JD) Konch, Jalaun.

3.

The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants are disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

4.

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. The State of Punjab, , State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and another Shri S.A. Khan, , State of Bihar and Another Vs. P.P. Sharma, IAS and Another, and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Others Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Others, . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge u/s 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.

5.

The prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of the aforementioned case is refused.

6.

However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and Another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon''ble Apex Court reported in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others, .

7.

For a period of 45 days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

8.

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off.