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

Hemlata And Others vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 February, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6760 of 2018 Applicant :- Hemlata And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The instant application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the order dated 19.1.2018 passed by C.J.M., Farrukhabad in Criminal Case No.4643 of 2016 (State Vs. Yashveer Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No.209 of 2016 under Sections 143, 353 IPC and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Mau Darwaza District Farrukhabad.
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 submission made at the bar relates 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 applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 or 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
The prayer for quashing the order is hereby refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants be considered and decided 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 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 applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.2.2018 Hasnain
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

Hemlata And Others vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 February, 2018
Judges
  • Rajul Bhargava
Advocates
  • Sushil Kumar Dubey