Court No. - 85
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20115 of 2020 Applicant :- Abhishek Yadav @ Guddu And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
Heard Shri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred seeking the quashing of entire proceedings in Special Case No.251 of 2020 (State vs. Abhishek Yadav alias Guddu and others) under Section 323, 504, 354 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Bakhira, District Sant Kabir Nagar arising out of Case Crime No.431 of 2019 pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Sant Kabir Nagar.
The contention of counsel for the applicants is that applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and no offence is made out against the applicants under aforesaid sections. He further submitted that present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment.
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 applicants. 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.
After arguing the case for quite some time at length, learned counsel for the applicants himself has given up to address the Court on merits of the case and prayed, that the purpose of his clients would suffice, if a direction may be given to the courts below to decide his bail application within specific time frame.
At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings is refused.
However, it is directed, that in case applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail the court below shall consider and decide the bail prayer of applicants in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Smt. Amarawati and another v. State of U.P., reported in 2004 (57)ALR 290, as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, reported in (2009) 3 ADJ 322 (SC).
For a period of 45 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the above directions, present application is disposed off.
Order Date :- 5.1.2021 P.P.