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

Prashant@Rajeev Gupta vs State Of Up And Another

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

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 55
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43046 of 2018
Applicant :- Prashant@Rajeev Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant 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 the summoning order dated 19.9.2018 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Aligarh in Complaint Case No. 8935 of 2017 (Smt. Rakhi Versus Prashant @ Rajeev Gupta and others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Civil Lines, District Aligarh.
The contention of learned 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. At last he submitted that the applicant is 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 applicant. 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 summoning order dated 19.9.2018 passed in the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, then the bail application of the applicant 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 four weeks 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.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally
disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.11.2018 NS
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

Prashant@Rajeev Gupta vs State Of Up And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 November, 2018
Judges
  • Chandra Dhari Singh
Advocates
  • Akhilesh