Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32584 of 2019 Applicant :- Baburam Saxena And 3 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Diwanshu Tiwari,Mithilesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, 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 summoning order dated 16.3.2019 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 90 of 2018 (Ram Asharey Katheriya Vs. Babu Ram & others), under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (Da) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Kannauj, District- Kannauj, pending in the court of Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Kannauj.
As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that on 1.8.2018 at about 2 p.m. the applicants abused the victim with the name of his caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate him and also assaulted him with lathi and danda, due to which Ram Asrey suffered injuries on his person and has been medically examined.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of inquiry, no offence is disclosed against the applicants and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of inquiry, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, entire proceedings cannot be quashed.
Moreover, all the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CrPC. At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light 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 disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the summoning order as well as entire proceedings is therefore refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear/surrender before the court below and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as expeditiously as possible after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.
With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.8.2019 KU