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

Shadab Ali vs State Of U P And Anr

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|19 September, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 53
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32869 of 2018 Applicant :- Shadab Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Saleem Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard Mohd. Saleem Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sudhir Pathak, learned AGA for the State.
This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings of Case No. 2704 of 2017, State vs. Shadab Ali (arising out of Case Crime No. 284 of 2017), under Section 420 I.P.C., Police Station Ganj, District Rampur, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.), Rampur.
On perusal of the impugned charge sheet and the materials in support of the same, this Court does not find it to be a case which can be determined or gone into in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. This Court cannot hold a parallel trial in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No such ground appears to be available to the applicant, on the basis of which the impugned charge sheet can be quashed going by the settled law in 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 Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.
Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the charge sheet is refused.
However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 45 days from today and applies for bail, his 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.
The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228, 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
For a period of 45 days from today or till the applicant surrenders 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, the application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 19.9.2018 BKM/-
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

Shadab Ali vs State Of U P And Anr

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
19 September, 2018
Judges
  • J J Munir
Advocates
  • Mohd Saleem Khan