Court No. - 78
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9494 of 2021 Applicant :- Chandan Lal And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Mishra,Rahul Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State through Video link and perused the record.
This Crl. Misc. application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the charge sheet dated 19.10.2018 as well as the cognizance order dated 22.09.2020 and the entire proceeding of Case No. 3084 of 2020 (State Vs Chandan Lal and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 356 of 2018, under Sections 452, 504, 336, 323, 324 IPC, P.S. Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur, pending in the Court of ACJM (SD0, Shahjahanpur.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. 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 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be, before the court below and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of case as well as charge sheet is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within two months 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 Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
For a period of two months 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, this application is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 20.5.2021 RavindraKSingh Digitally signed by Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav Date: 2021.05.20 17:18:37 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad