Uttarakhand High Court
C482/1317/2013 of Prabhat Gupta AND ANOTHER Vs State Of Uttarakhand AND ANOTHER on 31 December 2013
of 2013 Hon’ble V.K.Bist, J. Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. R.K. Sah, A.G.A. with Mr. Vijay Khanduri, Brief Holder for the State. Mr. Sandeep Tandon with Mrs. Sandhna Nishad, Advocate for the respondent no.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This criminal misc.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
C482 No.1317 of 2013Hon’ble V.K.Bist, J.
Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate for the
applicants. Mr. R.K. Sah, A.G.A. with Mr. Vijay Khanduri, Brief Holder for the State. Mr. Sandeep Tandon with Mrs. Sandhna Nishad, Advocate for the respondent no.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This criminal misc. application has been filed by the applicants for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.6980 of 2013 “State Vs. Prabhat Gupta and others”, registered with P.S. Nehru Colony, Dehradun, relating to offences punishable under Section 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First, Dehradun along with summoning order dated 26.06.2013 as well as charge sheet dated 21.04.2013 submitted in Case Crime No.43 of 2013.
Earlier F.I.R. was registered against the applicants. The Investigating Officer, after investigation, submitted charge sheet. Same was accepted by the Court. Thereafter, cognizance was taken by the Magistrate and the impugned summoning order has been passed. Against the summoning order, present criminal misc. application has been filed by the applicants.
I have considered the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.
In my view, this is not a fit case where process of law has been misused. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in catena of judgments has held that the High Court should interfere in the proceedings of the case in rarest of the rare cases. This Court does not find that this case comes under that category. The criminal misc. application is dismissed. However, it is observed that in case applicants surrender and moves bail application, the Court concerned shall decide the bail application of the applicants expeditiously.
Arpan
(V.K. Bist, J.) 31.12.2013