Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Vipin Sinha, J.
Pappu Chaudhary And 3 Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. And Another - Respondent
Application U/S 482 No. - 29024 of 2014
Decided On : 13-08-2014
Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Quashing of chargesheet and proceedings - Malafide intention for harassment - Right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. - Dismissal of application for quashing with provision for filing discharge application
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the chargesheet and entire proceedings of a case against them, alleging malafide intention for harassment.
Finding of the Court:
The court refused the prayer for quashing the proceedings but provided the applicant with the right to file a discharge application within a month, which would be considered and disposed of expeditiously by the concerned Court below.
Issues: The main issue was whether the proceedings of the case should be quashed based on the allegations of malafide intention for harassment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at the present stage and that the applicant has the right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C., with the provision for filing a discharge application within a month.
Final Decision: The application for quashing the proceedings was dismissed, but the applicant was provided with the opportunity to file a discharge application within a month, with a directive for the concerned Court below to consider and dispose of it expeditiously.
Based on the legal document provided, here are the key points regarding the case of Pappu Chaudhary And 3 Ors. - Appellant Versus State of U.P. And Another:
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha, J.
Supplementary affidavit filed in Court today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the chargesheet dated 20.4.2011 as well as entire proceedings of case no. 3657 of 2011; State Vs. Pappu Chaudhary and others arising out of case crime no. 2906 of 2009, U/s 304, 120B, 201, 147, 148, 149 IPC, P.S. Cantt., District Gorakhpur pending in the court of CJM, Gorakhpur.
3. The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicant 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.
4. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be 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.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments made in the present application, the prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case is refused.
6. However, it is provided that in case, the applicants move an appropriate application for discharge through counsel before the concerned Court below within a period of one month from today, the same shall be considered and disposed off as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, by the concerned Court below preferably within a period of four months, thereafter. For a period of five months from today or till the disposal of the discharge application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
