isha Ansari and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) and anr.

isha Ansari and ors. vs State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Sep 27, 2010

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/912303

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/912303
Court: Allahabad High Court
Judge: Rajesh Dayal Khare, J.
Decided On: Sep 27, 2010
Case Number: APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30316 of 201.
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India against the order dated 25.02.2004 made in R.E.A.No.954 of 1995 in REP.No.1/93 by the Hon'ble Additional Sub-Judge, Salem, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner herein seeking to implead themselves in the execution proceedings...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Section 482, 239, 245(2), 227, 228.

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

isha Ansari and ors.

Advocate Ashish Kumar Sinh, Adv.

Respondent

State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) and anr.

Legal References

Acts: Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Section 482, 239, 245(2), 227, 228.

Excerpt

prayer: civil revision petition filed under article 227 of constitution of india against the order dated 25.02.2004 made in r.e.a.no.954 of 1995 in rep.no.1/93 by the hon'ble additional sub-judge, salem, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner herein seeking to implead themselves in the execution proceedings in rep no.1/93 and thereby permit them to contest the claim of the first respondent......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. 3. 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 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 v. state of punjab, a.i.r. 1960 s.c. 866, state of haryana v. bhajan lal, 1992 scc (cr.) 426, state of bihar v. p.p.sharma, 1992 scc (cr.) 192 and lastly zandu pharmaceutical works ltd. v. mohd. saraful haq and another (para-10) 2005 scc (cr.) 283. 4. the disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. moreover, the applicants have got right of discharge under section 239 or 245(2) or 227/228, cr.p.c. as the case may 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. 5. the prayer for quashing the complaint case 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 their prayer for bail shall be considered in view of the settled law laid by the seven judges' decision of this court in the case of amrawati and another v. 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 v. 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. 6. however in case the applicants do not appear before the court below within.....

Full Judgment

1. Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicants, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State-respondent. The present 482 Petition has been filed for quashing of the proceedings of complaint case no. 2037 of 2009 under sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasya, Kushinagar.

2. Learned counsel for the applicants states that the criminal prosecution of the applicants is nothing but a counter blast to the proceedings initiated by the applicants' side against opposite party no. 2. Therefore, the same is bad in law. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the applicants 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.

3. 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 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 v. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.

4. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got right of discharge under Section 239 or 245(2) or 227/228, Cr.P.C. as the case may 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.

5. The prayer for quashing the complaint case 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 their prayer for bail shall be considered in view of the settled law laid by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another v. 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 v. 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.

6. 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.

Same Court & Year Allahabad · 2010 Same Parties isha Ansari and ors. vs State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) and anr. Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Rajesh Dayal Khare, J. Acts & Sections Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506; C...

Criminal