Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Kanahi And Others vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 January, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1768 of 2019 Applicant :- Kanahi And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pratibha Vohra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA representing the State and perused the record of the case.
By means of this application under sections 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court for quashing the charge sheet as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 2147 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 565 of2018, under Sections 323, 324, 504 IPC, PS Bahjoi, district Sambhal, pending in the court of Civil Judge (SD)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal at Chandausi.
Learned counsel for the applicants contends that charge sheet has illegally been filed by the investigating officer without proper investigation.
Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer of the applicants.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage, it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of facts, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this court 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 Hon'ble Supreme Court in R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.
The disputed defence of the accused also cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing of the proceedings as well as summoning order is refused.
The application is accordingly rejected.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear before the court concerned within one month from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be heard and disposed of as early as possible in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 21.1.2019 Ishrat
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

Kanahi And Others vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
21 January, 2019
Judges
  • Krishna Pratap Singh
Advocates
  • Pratibha Vohra