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

Suraj Nishad And Another vs State Of Up And Another

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

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 38
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38114 of 2018 Applicant :- Suraj Nishad And Another Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raghvendra Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Sri Rajesh Tripathi and Sri Hari Prakash Tiwari, Advocates, have jointly filed vakalatnama on behalf of the opp. party no. 2, let it be taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opp. party no. 2, 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 impugned chargesheet dated 31.10.2017 in case crime no. 330 of 2017, under Sections 354, 493, 496, 427, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. for applicant no. 1 and Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. for the applicant no. 2 P.S. Ahraula, District Azamgarh, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 13, Azamgarh.
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.
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 don't find any ground to quash the chargesheet filed in the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby 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 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 :- 27.10.2018/Gss
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

Suraj Nishad And Another vs State Of Up And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 October, 2018
Judges
  • Bachchoo Lal
Advocates
  • Raghvendra Prakash