Kanhaiya Pandey And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 38652 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Kanhaiya Pandey And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 November, 2024

Author: Siddharth

Bench: Siddharth

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:183675
 
Court No. - 48
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20519 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Kanhaiya Pandey And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Srivastava,Sushant Srivastava
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Siddharth,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 summoning order dated 11.10.2023 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Civil Judge(S.D.)/ F.T.C. Kushinagar Padrauna in compliant case no. 15670 of 2023 (Kamlesh Mishra Vs. Kanhaiya Pandey and others) under sections 323,504,506,406 I.P.C. P.S. Tamkuhiraj District Kushinagar pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge (S.D.)/F.T.C. Kushinagar, Padrauna.

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 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 disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

The prayer for quashing the summoning order is therefore refused.

However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 60 days from today and applies 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 60 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.

Order Date :- 23.11.2024

Atul kr. sri.