Court No. - 72
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19684 of 2017 Applicant :- Basaruddeen Alias Basru Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Dutt Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Madan Singh
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Krishna Dutt Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Madan Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet no.111A dated 24.12.2014, as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.6276 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No.215/2014, under Sections-147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 352, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C. and 3(1) X SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kanth, District-Moradabad, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-4, Moradabad.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the FIR allegations are inherently improbable if not completely absurd. According to him, the applicant had no connection with the religious practices of the opposite party no.2, inasmuch as the applicant and the opposite party no.2 belong to different religious faith and it is not the allegation in the FIR of opposite party no.2 having intended to perform any religious practice at any place or in any manner as may have interfered with the normal life of the religious practices of the applicant.
4. Perusal of the FIR reveals that a lumpsum allegation has been made without naming any person and without assigning any role in the alleged incident dated 04.08.2014 wherein a procession (allegedly being taken out by the ladies and others), was obstructed; verbally abused and; assaulted inside their house after being chased down by the applicant and others. It has further been alleged that certain "jaati suchak" words were used.
5. After making such an omnibus allegation, names of 20 persons had been mentioned as were involved in the occurrence without making any allegation of any role to any of the accused persons. Upon such an FIR, the investigation is stated to have taken place. Perusal of the statement would also reveal that Kuldeep the informant did not assign any role to any particular accused person. In the first part of the incident the procession taken out by the ladies of the house of opposite party no.2 is stated to have been obstructed. Then there are allegations of assault made by 20 persons (all male). Yet there is no injury report. Certain other witnesses described as independent witnesses denied the FIR allegation. Therefore, it has been submitted that at present prosecution is based on inherently improbable allegation and, in any case, the prosecution has no legs to stand being based on completely vague and general allegations and prejudiced/motivated statements.
6. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and the learned AGA, on the other hand, would submit that the FIR need not narrate the exact sequence of event. Inasmuch as, on a plain reading of the FIR and the statement of the informant and others, it does appear that the incident had taken place and the ingredients of the offence alleged are thus specifically made out, no interference is warranted in the present proceeding.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, in the first place, it is inherently improbable to accept the assault of the nature described in the FIR and the statement of the informant and others could be even true, inasmuch as twenty men are stated to have chased down ladies of the house of opposite party no.2 and to have assaulted ladies belonging to the family of opposite party no.2, then, however there is no injury report to support or substantiate such allegation.
8. Then, there is inherent improbability in the narration of the incident in the FIR itself, inasmuch as, without assigning any role and without making any specific accusation against any of the accused persons, they have all been roped in on common and lump sum allegations to which there does not exist any credible material to support the allegation of the informant or immediate family members, though some effort appears to have been made in that regard while recording statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
9. Then, it may further be noted, the incident is of the year 2015 whereas charge sheet was first submitted in the year 2017 though it is found to be dated 24.12.2014 and 30.09.2014. In the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, the allegation appears to be inherently improbable and too vague general and unsubstantiated as may not allow for any fruitful prosecution.
10. A petty dispute between two groups of villagers appears to have been blown completely out of proportion for reasons that the court is not required to speculate.
11. In view of the above, the present application is allowed and the proceedings against the applicant in the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 29.5.2019 S.Chaurasia