Court No. - 13
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38164 of 2018
Applicant :- Abdul Wahid
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Navin Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Navin Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned charge-sheet dated 29.09.2017 as well as cognizance order dated 12.01.2018 passed in Criminal Case No. 769 of 2018 (State vs. Nepal & others) arising out of case crime no. 598 of 2016, under section 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Shahar, District Bulandshahar pending before the C.J.M., Bulandshahar.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated in the F.I.R. lodged by the opposite party no. 2 with the allegation that his signatures have been forged on the guaranty deed of loan in favour of Shiv Raj Singh as well as in the affidavit of Shiv Raj Singh; that the applicant neither forged any signature of the opposite party no. 2 nor put the seal of tehsildar Bulandshahar over the same; that the opposite party no. 2 has not lodged F.I.R. against the borrower who may be the real culprit and no case is made out against the applicant.
Per contra, learned AGA submits that there is sufficient evidence on record on the basis of which charge-sheet has been filed and previously the applicant approached this court for quashing of the F.I.R. which was refused by this Court by giving protection against arrest till submission of charge-sheet.
From the perusal of the material 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 in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.
In view of discussions made above, I have come to the conclusion that learned counsel for the applicant has failed to show that there is any abuse of process of court or likelihood of miscarriage of justice for prevention of which the exercise of inherent powers by this Court is required. The application is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.
The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly dismissed.
However, if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below and applies for bail the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Order Date :- 27.10.2018 Bhanu