Court No. - 40
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22249 of 2019 Applicant :- Anand Vardhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Ali Imam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 24.2.2019, arising out of Case Crime No.106 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 325, 504, 506, IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.
Mahila Thana, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending before the Civil Judge (S.D.)/F.T.C. Gautam Buddh Nagar.
As per the allegations made in the first information report, it is alleged that the applicant was married to opposite party No.2 on 24.2.2017, however, the applicant started making illegal demand of dowry and for the non-fulfilment of which started harassing and maltreating the victim and even assaulted her due to which she suffered fracture injury. On the basis of said FIR police thoroughly investigated the matter and submitted charge sheet against the applicant on which the learned magistrate has taken cognizance on 1.5.2019.
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.
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 charge sheet is refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within thirty days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of settled law laid down 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 in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).
For a period of thirty days from today or till the applicant surrenders and applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 4.6.2019 T. Sinha