Court No. - 1
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24870 of 2018
Applicant :- Dr. Avinash Prakash Agarwal
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajni Ojha,Ravindra Nath Chaubey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Ms. Rajni Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Deepak Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 86 of 2018 arising out of case crime no 29 of 2017 under sections 498-A, 420, 495, 323, 506 I.P.C., police station Mahila Thana, District Gautam Buddh Nagar as well as charge-sheet No. 10 of 2018 submitted in the aforesaid case.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant and opposite party no. 2 were live-in partner and when the said relationship could not materialize, opposite party no. 2 lodged the present F.I.R. against the applicant claiming himself to be her husband. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the proceedings and submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicants on the basis of material collected during investigation which discloses cognizable offence.
From the perusal of the 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 applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions 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 prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case and the charge-sheet is refused.
However, if the applicants surrender before the court below and apply for bail, the court below while considering his prayer for bail shall take into account the fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
The application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 25.7.2018 Shiraz