Court No. - 72
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34825 of 2017 Applicant :- Chauthi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Satya Priya Mishra
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record. Upon consent, the matter has been proceeded.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State.
3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.268 of 2016 (Subhawati Devi Vs. Saurabh Kumar Rai & Others), under Sections- 323, 354-kha, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/1 (da, dha) SC/ST Act, Police Station-Belghat, District-Gorakhpur, including impugned summoning order dated 03.05.2017 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge/Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Gorakhpur.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that old civil dispute is pending between the parties. The matter is pending before the civil court in O.S. No.724 of 2002 before the Civil Judge (J.D.), Bansgaon, Gorakhpur. While that civil dispute is pending only to pressure the applicants, wholly false and frivolous allegations were made against police officials and wholly vague and general reference was made against the present applicants.
5. Resisting the present application, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and the learned AGA would submit that specific allegations have been made against applicant no.3 in the complaint which have also been supported in the statement recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C, however, he could not point to any fact allegation made against applicant nos.1 and 2.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it appears that besides making specific allegation against the police personnel, specific allegations have been made against applicant no.3 of assault as also of attempt to outrage the modesty of a women. At this stage, it is not required to examine the matter any further as to ascertain the truth content in such allegation. However ingredients of the offence alleged under Section 3/1 (da, dha) SC/ST Act, are clearly lacking inasmuch as there does not appear to exist any necessary fact allegation or other material as may bring out the ingredients of that offence. Accordingly, the charge sheet and the summoning of the applicant no.1 under Section 3/1 (da, dha) SC/ST Act, is quashed. Insofar as the ingredients of other offences appear to be made out against applicant no.3, the prayer for quashing the complaint made against him is declined.
7. However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant no.3 appears and surrenders before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, his 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 45 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant no.3.
8. With the aforesaid directions, this application is disposed of in respect of applicant no.3.
9. Insofar as the applicant nos.1 and 2 are concerned, the complaint and statement are silent. No fact allegation has been made against these persons. Accordingly, neither ingredients of offence alleged are made out against applicant nos.1 and 2 nor there is any justifiable reason to proceed against those applicants.
10. The present application is allowed in respect of applicant nos.1 and 2.
11. With the aforesaid observations, the present application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.5.2019 S.Chaurasia