SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Riyasat Hussain And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 29 November, 2019


?Court No. – 79

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 40216 of 2019

Applicant :- Riyasat Hussain And Another

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

Counsel for Applicant :- Azhar Hussain

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Ajit Singh,J.

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant in the court today is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 376 of 2014, under Section 406 I.P.C., P.S. Sadar, district-Agra, pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate court no. 5, Agra, as well as summoning order dated 21.9.2016.

The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants are 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.

Per contra learned A.G.A. Submitted that 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. The submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants relate to disputed question of facts, 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 disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge 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.

The submissions made by learned A.G.A. have force.

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case and the summoning order dated 21.9.2016 is refused.

However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within four weeks from today and apply 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 four weeks from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for 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 :- 29.11.2019




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