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

Rahul Kumar Niranjan And Others vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|18 September, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 5
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32756 of 2018 Applicant :- Rahul Kumar Niranjan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Siddharth Niranjan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This criminal misc. application has been filed with the prayer to quash the complaint dated 27.05.2015 summoning order dated 28.03.2018 passed by the Special Judge (ST/ST Act) Jalaun at Orai, District Jalaun and all subsequent proceedings in pursuance thereof in Complaint Case No. 03 of 2017 ( Jugal Kishore Vs. Jagdish and others), under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC & Section -3 (i) (x) SC/ST Act pending in the Court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Jalaun at Orai, District Jalaun.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the impugned complaint case has been lodged by the complainant-opposite party no.2 containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the applicants with the ulterior intention of harassing the applicants; entire family members have been implicated in the present case on the basis of general allegations; apart from the bald allegations made in the complaint case, no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the applicants in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned complaint, which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint case, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out.
Having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned complaint case as well as the other material brought on record, I find no good ground to quash the complaint case.
After hearing learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA, it is directed that in case, petitioners appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall 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 judgement 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 45 days from today or till petitioners surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against petitioners. However, in case, petitioners do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 18.9.2018 T.S.
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

Rahul Kumar Niranjan And Others vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
18 September, 2018
Judges
  • Mahboob Ali
Advocates
  • Siddharth Niranjan