Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29932 of 2018 Applicant :- Irshad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Arshad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Sri Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Advocate has filed appearance on behalf of opposite party No.2 today in Court which is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Kumar Srivastava learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and the learned A.G.A.
3. Sri Sanjay Kumar Srivastava learned counsel for opposite party No.2 submits that in the case of co-accused application U/S 482 No. 10890 of 2018 has already been disposed of on the following grounds:
"Sri Vivek Dhaka, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vinay Shankar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State are present.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned charge-sheet No.01 dated 23.08.2017 submitted in Case Crime No. 124 of 2017 under Sections 452, 307, 323, 504 and 506 P.S. Flawda, District Meerut as well as the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 3216 of 2017 (State Vs. Parvez and others) pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that prior to the present occurrence, he had lodged an F.I.R. against the father of the O.P. No.2 and by way of retaliation, the present F.I.R. has been lodged. Learned counsel for the applicant further stated that the present applicant has been falsely implicated as there is no injury caused to the O.P. No.2.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the charge sheet.
According to the F.I.R., on 4.7.2017 at 7:00 P.M. this occurrence is stated to have taken place in which accused Suaib along with co-accused have committed this occurrence in which internal injuries are alleged to have been suffered by the O.P. No.2.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail may 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 30 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 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."
4. Present application is disposed of on the same terms and conditions.
Order Date :- 5.9.2018 faraz