Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BHURE SINGH & OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P. & ANOTHER

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Bhure Singh & Others v. State Of U.P. & Another - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 1533 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 1824 (6 February 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No.45

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. 1533 OF 2007

Bhure Singh and others..............................Petitioner.

                                     Versus

State of U.P. and another........................ ..Respondents.

Hon. Mrs. Poonam Srivastav, J.

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

Submission is that N.C.R. was lodged at the instance of the petitioners on 25.9.2006. The police challaned the rival parties under Sections 151/107/116 Cr.P.C. on the same day. Chalani report is annexed as annexure no. 8 to the writ petition. It appears that an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was preferred regarding the same incident by the contesting respondent, and the same was treated as a complaint. After recording statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the Magistrate summoned the petitioners vide order dated 28.11.2006.  This order was challenged in criminal revision no. 4 of 2007. The revisional court dismissed the revision on 16.1.2007. Both the orders are impugned in the instant writ petition.  Submission on behalf of the petitioners is that the complainant deliberately failed to mention exact date of the complaint for obvious reason and it was only after thought with a view to harass the petitioners.  

After hearing counsels for the respective parties, it is true that the date of filing of the complaint is not shown in the complaint. Copy of the same has been placed before me in support of his contention. Since there are injuries and injury report has been brought on record, I am not inclined to quash the impugned orders.  It will be open for the petitioners to claim discharge at the appropriate stage during the trial.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they have not obtained bail.

However, in the event the petitioners appear before the courts below within a period of two weeks from today and move bail application, the same shall be decided expeditiously, preferably, if possible on the same day. For a period of two weeks, no coercive measure shall be taken against them.

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is finally disposed of.

Dt. 6.2.2007

rkg


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.