Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Anurag Yadav @ Reshu And Another vs State Of Up And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 April, 2019
Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16836 of 2019
Applicant :- Anurag Yadav @ Reshu And Another Opposite Party :- State Of UP And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge-sheet no.03 of 2018, dated 23.01.2018 and order of cognizance dated 14.03.2018 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jhansi in Special Case No.334 of 2018 (State Vs. Anurag Yadav @ Reshu and others) arising out of Case crime No.0004 of 2018, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3(1)(Da) SC/ST Act, P.S. Shahjahanpur, District Jhansi, pending in the court of learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jhansi.
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 purpose of causing 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 at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court 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 prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is refused.
However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and applies 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 30 days from today or till applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against applicants. However, in case, applicants does 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 :- 29.4.2019 R./
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Judges
  • Ajit Singh
Advocates
  • Anil Kumar Verma