Court No. - 78
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6172 of 2021
Applicant :- Happe @ Harveer Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Haseeb Alam Ansari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State through video conferencing and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the non bailable warrant dated 28.3.2017 arising out of Case Crime No.261 of 2014, under Sections 392 and 411 IPC at Police Station Barhan, District Agra pending in the court of Special Judge, Agra.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the first information report was lodged on the basis of false facts and also on the basis of malice.The court below issued NBW against the applicant on 28.3.2017 but the same has not been informed to the applicant as applicant is living in Delhi for his livelihood and when the applicant back to the house after lockdown, he got information about issuance of NBW. The applicant is having no criminal history.
From the perusal of 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 relates to the disputed question 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 applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be, before the court below 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 case as well as charge sheet is refused.
However, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 60 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 60 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 applicant. However, in case, the applicant did not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
It is made clear that the applicant will not be granted any further time by this Court for surrendering before the Court below as directed above.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally
disposed of.
Order Date :- 20.5.2021 Ajeet