Court No. - 49
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2840 of 2018 Petitioner :- Amod Shankar Shukla And Anr.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Singh,Thakur Azad Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sarvesh Chaubey
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present petition has been filed to stay the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 31.1.2018 passed by Additional Session Judge, Court no. 2, Varanasi and impugned order dated 6.7.2017 passed by Additional Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 3, Varanasia and further prayed to stay the proceeding of Case No. 1530 of 2015 (State Vs. Amod Shankar Shukla and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 279/2014, under Section 452, 354, 354 Kha, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Bhelupur, District Varanasi, pending before the A.C.J.M.-III, Varanasi.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that no offence against the petitioners is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioners involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.
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 petitioners at this stage. 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.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.
However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the petitioners appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail 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 judgement passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
With the aforesaid directions, this petition is finally disposed of. Order Date :- 31.7.2018 Prakhar