CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Satish Chandra Gupta vs State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 9 January 2012 · Citation: (2012) 01 AHC CK 0502

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajesh Dayal Khare, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 311, 482
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Application No. 25708 of 2011
Download PDFAsk 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

6 paragraphs · 366 words

Hon''ble Rajesh Dayal Khare, J.—Heard learned counsel the applicant and learned A.G.A. The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the proceedings of Special Trial No.78 of 2006, in case crime no.174/175 of 2006, u/s 135 of Electricity Act, police station Raj Ghat, Gorakhpur and also for quashing of the order dated 21.5.2011 whereby the application of the applicant, filed u/s 311 Cr.P.C. has been rejected as well as for quashing of the order dated 1.7.2011 whereby non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant.

2.

The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is 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.

3.

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case it to be seen.

4.

The prayer for quashing the non bailable warrant order is refused.

5.

However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, then his prayer for bail be considered in view of the settled law laid by the Seven Judges'' decision of 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 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

6.

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