Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Ratna And 2 Ors vs State Of U.P. And Another
2014 Latest Caselaw 1874 ALL

Citation : 2014 Latest Caselaw 1874 ALL
Judgement Date : 20 May, 2014

Allahabad High Court
Ratna And 2 Ors vs State Of U.P. And Another on 20 May, 2014
Bench: Rajesh Dayal Khare



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 50
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17903 of 2014
 

 
Applicant :- Ratna And 2 Ors
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Singh,Shashank Kumar
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare,J.

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

This  application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the  entire proceedings of Complaint case No. 1190 of 2012 under Sections 323, 379, 394, 420, 447, 504, 506   IPC, police station Adampur, district Amroha pending in the court ofJudicial Magistrate,Hasanpur, district Amroha.

The contention of the 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. It is further contended that the matter is purely of civil nature which has been dragged into criminal prosecution of the applicants at the behest of the opposite party No. 2, which is bad in law.

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. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 or 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and they are  free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court. 

The prayer for quashing the proceedings is 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 :- 20.5.2014/faraz

 

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter