Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 3773 (ALL)

Rahmatulla v. State of U. P.

2016-11-22

VINOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA-III

body2016
JUDGMENT Vinod Kumar Srivastava-III,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the charge sheet dated 27.10.2014, cognizance order dated 12.11.2014 and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2624/9 of 2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 214 of 2014, under Sections 452, 420 and 506 I.P.C., police station Mansoorpur, district Muzaffar Nagar. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that Late Mukeem father of the applicant Rahmatulla had executed a sale deed in favour of Smt. Farzana, but the mutation was not made in favour of Smt. Farzana and after death of Mukeem, the said property came in the name of the applicant and the name of the applicant was recorded in the revenue record, and thereafter the applicant sold the property and executed the sale deed in favour of the mother and bhabhi of the opposite party No. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the FIR has been lodged on the basis of false and concocted allegations and the applicant is innocent and the owner of the said property. Learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case. After having heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and from perusal of the materials available 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 applicant. 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 against the applicant. The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant prayed that a direction be issued to the court concerned to decide the bail application of the applicants expeditiously. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant, it is hereby provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court concerned within thirty days from today and apply for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant, it is hereby provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court concerned within thirty days from today and apply for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. For a period of thirty days from today or till the applicant appears and surrenders before the trial court whichever is earlier no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.