Court No. - 54
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28971 of 2018 Applicant :- Smt. Geeta Devi And 5 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- M J Akhtar,Sri V.M. Zaidi (Senior Advocate) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Sri S.P.S.Parmar, Advocate filed vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 today is taken on record.
Heard V.M.Zaidi, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri M.J.Akhtar, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.
By means of the present 482 Cr.P.C. application, the applicants are challenging the order dated 07.07.2018 passed by learned C.J.M., Bhadohi at Gyanpur and the proceedings of case no. 3580 of 2017, State Vs. Vimla Devi & others arising out of case crime no. 237 of 2016 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B and 34 IPC.
Learned counsel for the applicants have tried to assail the judgment passed by C.J.M., Bhadohi dated 07.07.2018, it has been clearly conceded by the learned counsel for the applicant that they have not been bailed out till date.
I have gone through the impugned order which is just and valid and I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by C.J.M., Bhadohi at Gyanpur During argument the Sri S.P.S.Parmar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submitted that none of the applicants have surrendered so far and without getting themselves surrender they have filed discharge application, which is against the scheme of Cr.P.C.
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 disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case and the charge sheet is refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 45 days from today and applies 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 or till the applicant surrenders and applies for bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.9.2018 Abhishek Sri.