Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46531 of 2019
Applicant :- Kalam And Anr
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mashaluddin Shah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Shri Mashaluddin Shah, learned counsel for the applicants and in opposition, Shri Amit Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been moved on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 25.09.2018 as well as the entire proceedings, in N.C.R. No. 26 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station - Rasulpur, District - Firozabad, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-Ist, Firozabad.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicants that in the present case, there is no injury caused. Earlier, the opposite party no. 2 has lodged an F.I.R. against one Afsar and two unknown persons under Sections 452, 504, 354, 506 of I.P.C., being Case Crime No. 166 of 2019. Hence, this is nothing but malicious prosecution of the accused-applicants and thus, the charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings thereof need to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing the charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings.
I have gone through the N.C.R. After investigation, charge- sheet has been submitted and as per allegation, the applicants are stated to have beaten up the opposite party no. 2 by lathi, danda, hockey, etc. At this stage, it cannot be denied that cognisable offence is made out against the accused-applicants. The veracity of the submissions cannot be tested in proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in cases of R.P. Kapur v. The State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others v. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, State of Bihar and Anr. v. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. v. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
In view of above, the prayer for quashing the charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings in the aforesaid case is refused.
However, it is provided that in case the accused-applicants appear and surrender before the Court within 30 days from today and move an application for bail, the same shall be decided in terms of the settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another v. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).
For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive measure shall be adopted against the applicants. However, in case the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
Furthermore, it is provided that the applicants may approach the trial court to seek discharge at appropriate stage, if so advised, and before the said forum, they may raise all the pleas which have been taken by them here. If such an application is moved, the same shall be disposed of without being influenced by the observation(s) made by this Court.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019
I. Batabyal