Back
2024 Supreme(All) 1709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Dinesh Pathak, J.
Bhagwan Singh – Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Opposite Parties
Application U/S 482 No. - 38842 of 2024
Decided On : 25-11-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicant : Ankit Agarval
For the Opposite Party : G.A.
Important Points
The court can exercise inherent jurisdiction to quash complaints when the applicant is willing to cooperate with court proceedings and seeks protection.
Subject
Criminal Law - Quashing of Complaint
Act Referred
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.406, S.504, S.506
Headnote
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Inherent jurisdiction - Quashing of complaint - Applicant sought quashing of complaint under Sections 406, 504 and 506 IPC - Applicant willing to cooperate with court proceedings - Court granted protection and directed to move bail application within three weeks - No coercive action for six weeks. (Paras 2, 5, 6)
(B) Application - Final disposal - Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the application without making observations on merits, ensuring the applicant's rights are protected. (Paras 5, 7)
JUDGMENT :
Dinesh Pathak, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant (Opposite Party No. 2) as well as learned A.G.A. representing State-opposite party No. 1 and perused the record on Board.
2. The applicants has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the impugned complaint as well as impugned order dated 28.06.2019 passed in complaint Case No. 414 of 2021, Pradeep Versus Suraj and other, under Sections 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Vrindavan, District Mathura, pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fast Track Court/Judicial Magistrate, Mathura.
3. After due deliberation at length, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he is not pursuing the instant application on merits. He has further submitted that the present applicant is willing and ready to co-operate with the courts below and participate in the court proceedings provided some protection may be granted to him. It is next submitted that the present applicant has never intended to ignore the court proceedings.
4. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the contesting-opposite party No. 2 has no objection if protection is granted to the present applicant to enable them to appear before the court below.
5. In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served to keep this matter pending, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present application, without making any observation on the merits of the case as mentioned in the present application, with a direction that the present applicant, in case, appears/surrenders and move a bail application before the court below within a period of three weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided by the court concerned in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three weeks thereafter.
6. For a period of six weeks or till the decision on the bail application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the present applicants.
7. As such, instant application is finally disposed of.
