Court No. - 15
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5532 of 2018 Petitioner :- Ahsan Master And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Suneel Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Prashant Kumar, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for setting a side the orders dated 02.07.2018 passed by Additional Session Judge, Court NO. 4, Rampur in Criminal Revision No.297 of 2016 (Ahsan Master and another vs. State of U.P. and another) by which the revision has been rejected as well as the order dated 22.8.2016 passed by the Civil Judge (S.D.)/F.T.C., Rampur in Criminal Complaint Case No.150 of 2015 (Smt.Ruchi Chauhan vs. Ahsan Master and another) under section 354 IPC, P.S. Civil Lines, District Rampur whereby the petitioners were summoned to face trial.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the present complaint is a counter-blast against the accused- petitioners because earlier an FIR was lodged by the Deputy CMO against the respondent no.2 in which the accused- petitioner no. 1 was a witness. Thereafter, NCR was lodged by the accused petitioner no. 2 against the respondent no. 2 and her husband under sections 323, 504, 506 IPC wherein after permission from the Magistrate concerned, the investigation is going on. Another FIR was lodged by the accused petitioner no.1 against the respondent no. 2 and her husband being Case Crime No.692 of 2014 under sections 406, 504, 506 IPC. If proceedings are allowed to continue that would amount to an abuse of process of court.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the impugned orders.
Perused the summoning order. The same has been passed on the basis of evidence recorded under section 200 Cr.P.C of the respondent no. 2 in which she has stated that on 7.11.2014 at 8.00 P.M. accused petitioners had molested her at gun point. The said version has been supported by PW 1 Pappu and PW2 Chunni Lal. Therefore the statement recorded by the court below cannot be disbelieved at this stage as the same would require trial.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604 and State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for setting aside the impugned orders is refused.
However, it is provided that if the petitioners appear and surrender before the court below and move bail application within 30 days from today, the same shall be decided in accordance with law expeditiously.
With aforesaid direction, this writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.9.2018 AU