Court No. - 74
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34891 of 2019
Applicant :- Gautam Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Bhagwan Dutt Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anup Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge- sheet, cognizance order dated 16.5.2019 as well as the18.8.2019 issuing non-bailable warrant in Case No. 5707 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 149 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 376, 377, 511 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kothibhar, District Maharajgaj pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Maharajganj and further to stay further proceedings of aforesaid case.
It is submitted by the learned counsel of the applicant that the FIR has been lodged on false grounds while the applicant has not committed any offence. The police has also submitted charge sheet on the basis of insufficient evidence against the applicant. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence are lacking. The present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention. Learned counsel for the applicant pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned AGA opposed the prayer.
I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.
As is evident, 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 a prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in the 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. From a perusal of the material available on record and keeping in view the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that offences levelled against the applicant are not made out. Hence, prayer made in the application is refused.
In the last, learned counsel has urged that direction for expeditious disposal of bail application of the applicant be given.
Hence, it is observed that in case applicant surrenders before the court below and applies for bail within thirty days from today, the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of thirty days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.
It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicant to surrender before the court concerned.
With the aforesaid observations, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019/safi