Court No. - 53
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14093 of 2018 Applicant :- Ashok Singh @ Jhinku Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arunesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard Sri Arunesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Kamal Singh Yadav, learned AGA alongwith Sri Abhinav Tripathi appearing for the State.
This is an application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the Charge Sheet No.1 of 2017 dated 06.10.2017 submitted by the police in Case Crime No.0319 of 2017, under Sections 147, 323, 354B, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)B (1) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Kaptanganj, District Kushi Nagar and quash the order dated 04.04.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Kushi Nagar as well as further proceeding of S.T. No.135 of 2017 (State Vs. Ashok @ Jhinku & Ors.) pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Kushi Nagar.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that in regard to the same incident dated 28.06.2016 applicant no.3 Vijay Bahadur Singh @ Vijay Singh son of Ram Paras Singh lodged an FIR on 29.06.2016 giving rise to Case Crime No.0424 of 2016, under Section 304 I.P.C., P.S. Kaptanganj, District Kushi Nagar against the husband of opposite party no.2 and others wherein after investigation a charge sheet has been submitted by the police and the case is proceeding in court.
Eleven months later in regard to the same incident dated 28.06.2016 a FIR giving rise to the impugned charge sheet was registered on 22.07.2017 proceeding under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. by opposite party no.2 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 14, 354 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)D of S.C./S.T. Act with a view to bring/pressure upon applicant no.3 to withdraw from the prosecution of the case instituted against the husband of opposite party no.2 which is proceeding in court. The submission is that the impugned prosecution is clearly an abuse of process of Court and one designed to coerce the applicants into giving up prosecution of case instituted by him.
A perusal of the two FIRs indicate that both are cross cases and relate to the same occurrence. As such, it is difficult at this stage to determine the truth or otherwise of the allegations in this proceedings.
The prayer for quashing the impugned charge sheet is, therefore, refused.
Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 45 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.
It is also open to the applicants to move the Magistrate at the appropriate stage for discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. and if when such application is made the same shall be considered and decided on its merits by the Magistrate uninfluenced by anything said in this order.
For a period of 45 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, the application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 24.4.2018 Shahroz