Court No. - 53
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17378 of 2018 Applicant :- Anil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Durgesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard Sri Durgesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nitin Kesarwani, learned AGA for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the entire criminal proceedings of impugned order dated 05.03.2018 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.3/Special Judge (Gangster Act), Meerut in S.T. No. 50 of 2014, State of U.P. vs. Deepak and others, arising out of case crime no. 345 of 2011, under Sections 307/34, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Sardhana, District Meerut.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated mala fide on account of the fact that a civil suit is pending between the parties being O.S. No.
269 of 2001 filed before the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Meerut by the grand mother of the applicant against one Dinesh Kumar who is the relative of opposite party no.2. It is submitted that no role has been assigned to the applicant in the allegation of assault.
The learned AGA has opposed the motion to admit this application to hearing and has submitted that the name of the applicant finds mention in the FIR as one of the assailants and has drawn the attention of this Court to the injury report at page 22/23 where there are five injuries, three of which are lacerated wounds on of which is on the head and two contusions one below the face and other on the left shoulder. Injury nos.1 and 4 have been advised to be kept under observation and subjected to x-ray. Later on, in a supplementary report of the victim, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure-3, the injuries have been found dangerous to life.
Considering the entire materials on record, it is not a case where there is no material in the case diary worth trial and one where the prosecution may be nipped in the bud. The prayer for quashing the charge sheet is, therefore, refused.
However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, his 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 Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
For a period of 45 days from today or till disposal of the bail application whichever be earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.
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, the application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 Imroz