Court No. - 70
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3825 of 2019 Applicant :- Aajam And 04 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Bhushan Singh,Yashpal Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party no.1 and perused the record with the assistance of leaned counsel for the parties.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 11.7.2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 145 of 2016, cognizance order dated 1.2.2018 and proceedings of Session Trial No. 50 of 2018 (State Vs. Mohd. Islam), under Sections 147, 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC and 3(2)(5) the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station, Saraimamrej, District - Allahabd pending in the court of learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Allahabad.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that:-
(i) On 8.6.2016, First Information Report was lodged by Sandeep Kumar/opposite party no.2 against the applicants as Case Crime No. 145 of 2016, under sections 147, 323, 506, 3(2) (5) Ka the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
(ii) After investigation, Investigating Officer submitted charge- sheet dated by adding some other Sections 147, 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act.
(iii) The informant/opposite party no.2 did not receive any injury in the said occurrence.
(iv) The Investigating Officer has not conducted fair investigation.
(v) Applicant has been falsely implicated by the informant with mala fide intention only with a view to harass the applicants.
(vi) No offence is made out against the applicants.
(vii) The impugned criminal proceeding against the applicants is liable to be quashed by this Court.
Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State submitted that considering the material evidences and allegations against the applicants on record, as on date, as per prosecution case, the cognizable offence against the applicants is made out. Under the facts and circumstances of the present case as well as materials on record against the applicants, the criminal proceedings against the applicants cannot be said to be abuse of the process of the Court. There is no illegality in the impugned cognizance order dated 1.2.2018. It is submitted that this application is liable to be dismissed.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the entire record, I find that in the said incident Smt. Heerawati wife of Shyam Lal (mother of opposite party no.2) has received injury appended as Annexure No.2 with the application. This Court is of the view that it is well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is also settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sprangly, only in such a appropriate cases, where uncontroverted allegations made in FIR or charge-sheet and the evidence relied in support of same do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage.
It is also well settled that at the stage of summoning the accused, the court below is not required to go into the merit and demerit of the case. Genuineness or otherwise of the allegation cannot be even determined at the stage of summoning the accused.
In view of above, this Court does not find that this case fall in a categories as recognized by the Apex Court for quashing the criminal proceeding of the trial court at pre-trial stage. Considering the facts, circumstances and nature of allegations against the applicant in this case, the cognizable offence is made out. There is no manifest error of law in the impugned cognizance order dated 1.2.2018. The impugned criminal proceeding under the facts of this case cannot be said to be abuse of the process of the Court. There is no good ground to invoke inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by this Court. Hence, criminal proceeding against the applicants is not liable to be quashed. The relief as claimed by the applicants in this application is accordingly refused.
At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that in case some protection is granted by this Court, the applicants will surrender before the concerned court below. The learned Additional Government Advocate for the State does not dispute such prayer of the applicant.
Considering the last prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that in case applicants appear before the concerned court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, the bail application of the applicants shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with settled law. For the period of 45 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
With the above observations, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.1.2019 AK Pandey