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

Mohd Shafik @ Hazi Naushe And Others vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 November, 2018


Court No. - 55
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42884 of 2018
Applicant :- Mohd. Shafik @ Hazi Naushe And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the summoning order dated 9.10.2018 passed by MM-6, Kanpur Nagar in complaint case no. 3253 of 2018 (Haji Saffan Vs. Mohd,. Safik @ Haji Naushee and others) under sections 323, 379, 504 IPC, P.S. Kohna, District Kanpur Nagar.
The contention of learned 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. At last he submitted that the applicants are ready to appear before the court and to face the trial. He sought some time to surrender before the court below.
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.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the proceedings of the aforesaid complaint, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
However, in the interest of justice, 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 :- 30.11.2018 Prajapati
[Chandra Dhari Singh, J]
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Mohd Shafik @ Hazi Naushe And Others vs State Of U P And Another


High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

30 November, 2018
  • Chandra Dhari Singh
  • Deepak Singh