Court No. - 2
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22496 of 2019 Applicant :- Chandra Sahai And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Varun Dev Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Varun Dev Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vimal Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved with a prayer to quash the order dated 25.10.2016 as well as consequential orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Mainpuri in Criminal Case No. 2180 of 2016 (State Vs. Neeresh and others), arising out of case crime no. 284 of 2014, under Sections 498-A 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Bichhwan, District Mainpuri and to quash the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case and also a prayer is made to stay the proceedings in this case till the disposal of this application.
Learned counsel for the applicants argues that the non bailable warrant may be stayed.
I have gone through the order-sheet which has been annexed by learned counsel for the applicants at page 35 to 44 and it reflects that the accused-applicants is running absent since long and hence, the N.B.Ws. have been issued against them to secure their presence as the charge sheet was filed in this case on 31.7.2015. It is also apparent that because of lingering of the trial by the accused side, the opposite party no.2 has filed an application before this Court being Criminal Misc. Application No.46027 of 2018 (Smt. Deepti Vs. State and others), under Sections 498-A 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, in which a direction was issued for expeditious disposal of this case. Thereafter, the trial court has issued N.B.W. against the applicants to conclude the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the charge sheet.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of 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 and State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicant be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid-down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment 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 30 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 aforesaid direction, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 10.6.2019 Neeraj