Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Dhirendra Nath Rai And Others vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 May, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 62
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19149 of 2018
Applicant :- Dhirendra Nath Rai And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nitin Chandra Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishna Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned charge sheet dated 19.9.2017 as well as summoning order dated 9.11.2017 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gorakhpur and entire proceedings of Case No.11067 of 2017 (State Vs. Dhirendra Nath Rai and others) arising out of case crime no.189 of 2017, under Sections 147/148/149/307 & Section 30 of Arms Act, PS Kotwali, District Gorakhpur.
The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants 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.
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 question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred under Section 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. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge under Sections 239 or 227 or 245 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.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings, complaint case and order impugned is refused.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.5.2018 Rishabh
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Dhirendra Nath Rai And Others vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 May, 2018
Judges
  • Krishna Singh
Advocates
  • Nitin Chandra Mishra