SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mahesh Pal And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 10 December, 2019


?Court No. – 74

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 45470 of 2019

Applicant :- Mahesh Pal And Another

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.429 of 2019 arising out of Crime No.568 of 2017 under Section 354 IPC, Police Station Nigohi, District Shahjahanpur pending in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.) / F.T.C., Shahjahanpur. Further prayer has been made to stay the proceedings of the aforesaid case.

It is submitted by the learned counsel of the applicants that one FIR had already been lodged on behalf of the applicants’ side against the father of opposite party no.2 for the offence under Sectionsection 354 IPC on 1.5.2017 itself regarding the offence said to have been committed on 28.4.2017. As a counter blast, present F.I.R. has been lodged on 2.5.2017 on the basis of false facts with malafide intention in order to pressurize the applicants. At this stage, learned counsel has also referred to the statement of the victim and the witness thereof and argued that there are contradictions in their statement about the presence of the victim as well as the witness concerned at the place of occurrence at the time of incident. It is further argued that the Magistrate concerned while taking cognizance in the matter has not taken into consideration this fact and without applying judicial mind took cognizance against the applicants.

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer.

From a perusal of the material available on record and keeping in view the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that offences levelled against the applicants are not made out. 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 a prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in the 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 made in the application is refused.

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants prays that a direction may be issued to the court below for expeditious disposal of the bail application of the applicants.

Hence, it is directed that in case the applicants surrender before the court below and apply for bail within 30 days from today, the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicants for surrender before the court concerned.

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 10.12.2019 / ss



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation