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

Sanjeev @ Sanju Gupta & Others vs State Of U P & Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 April, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 41
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5840 of 2003
Applicant :- Sanjeev @ Sanju Gupta & Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Shandilya,Vivek Shandilya
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Harsh Narayan Singh
Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare,J.
None is present for the applicants.
Heard Sri Harsh Narayan Singh learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the proceedings of case No. 2567 of 199 arising out of case crime No. 130 of 1997 under Sections 364, 302, 201 IPC, police station Kotwali Jhanis, district Jhansi pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi and also to quash the charge sheet dated 25.4.2003 filed in the aforesaid case.
It has been averred in the affidavit accompanying the 482 application 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.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings and charge sheet is 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 expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law, after hearing the Public Prosecutor.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of. Interim order, if any, stands discharged.
Sri Harsh Narayan Singh learned counsel for the private opposite party undertakes to inform the leaned counsel for the applicants in writing 48 hours about the order passed today.
Registry is directed to transmit a copy of this order to the court below concerned forthwith.
Order Date :- 27.4.2018 faraz
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

Sanjeev @ Sanju Gupta & Others vs State Of U P & Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 April, 2018
Judges
  • Rajesh Dayal Khare
Advocates
  • Sudhir Shandilya Vivek Shandilya