Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10120 of 2021
Applicant :- Asiya Khatoon And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ghan Shyam Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A
Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 6730 of 2020 (State Vs. Hazrat Ali and Others)/charge sheet dated 23.11.2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 173 of 2020 under Sections 498-A, 306 I.P.C., P.S., Khesraha, District Siddharth Nagar as well as impugned summoning order dated 11.11.2020 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siddharth Nagar.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that applicants were living separately from the deceased in Mumbai. Applicants have been falsely implicated; they are innocent; uncle of the deceased demanded some money which applicants were unable to pay, hence false F.I.R. has been lodged against them; charge-sheet has been wrongly filed as the same has been presented without application of mind.
Per-contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the contention of learned counsel for the applicants.
Perusal of the record reveals that in the statement of mother of deceased and other witnesses, there is allegation with regard to harassment and beating.
In M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharastra and Others, 2020 SCC Online SC 850, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held:
"iv) The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection, as it has been observed, in the rarest of rare case (not to be confused with the formation in the context of death penalty).
v) While examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of which is sought, the Court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR/complaint;
vi) Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial stage;
vii) Quashing of a complaint/FIR should be an exception rather than an ordinary rule."
Following other authorities can be cited on the aforesaid point:
R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604.
This Court cannot embark upon enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness of the statements of witnesses. Thus, these are disputed questions of fact which can be adjudged upon in the trial only.
In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that learned trial court be directed to dispose of the bail application of the applicants in light of the Judgement of this Court passed in Brahm Singh and Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 15699 of 2016.
Learned trial court is directed to abide by the judgement of Brahm Singh and Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others while considering the bail application of the applicants.
With this direction, the present Application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.9.2021
A. Mandhani