Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27193 of 2018
Applicant :- Charan Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Prashant Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to the quash the summoning order dated 15.9.2017 in Complaint Case No. 679 of 2017 (Ganga Ram Vs. Charan Singh and others), under Section 427, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, P.S. Dhanaura, District Amroha, pending in the court of II- Additional Civil Judge, (Jr. Div.)/ J.M., Amroha.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant nos. 1 and 2 are brothers of opposite party no. 2. The applicants have been falsely implicated. No such occurrence has taken place as alleged. If the proceedings are allowed to continue that would amount to abuse of process of law.
According to complaint, the accused applicants are alleged to have beaten the opposite party no. 2 and two children of the opposite party no. 2 and also the crop of sugarcane has been destroyed. The said version of the complaint is supported by the statement of the complaint as well as two witnesses, which cannot be disbelieved at this stage, as the same would require trial.
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, 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 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, their prayer for bail may 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 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 the aforesaid directions, this application is finally
disposed of.
Order Date :- 5.9.2018
A.P. Pandey