Court No. - 44 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36581 of 2018 Applicant :- Ajai @ Pardeshi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Parmeshwar Kr. Chaudhary,Swarn Lata Suman Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to make necessary correction in the memo of the bail application during the course of the day.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings as well as charge sheet dated 18.11.2017 in case crime no. 206 of 2017 under Section 3/4 POCSO Act and under Sections 420, 376 IPC, Police station-Kapsethi, District-Varanasi pending in the Court of Juvenile Justice Court, Varanasi.
The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
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 submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case and the chargesheet is refused.
After hearing learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. this application is finally disposed of with a direction that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the Courts below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, then his bail application shall be considered and decided by both the courts below expeditiously in accordance with law after hearing the Public Prosecutor in the aforesaid crime number for the aforesaid offence.
It is made clear that no further time would be allowed beyond above-mentioned 30 days on any ground.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is disposed of. Order Date :- 30.10.2018 Sumit S