Court No. - 83
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28506 of 2019
Applicant :- Smt. Kalpana And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ravikant Tiwari,Jayendra Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 5788 of 2018 (Smt. Dolly Vs. Pradeep and others), under Sections 354A, 504, 506, 323 of IPC, Police Station Thana Sadar Bazar, Agra, District Agra pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M., II, Agra.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that applicant no. 1 Smt. Kalpana and applicant no. 3 Pradeep are sister-in-law and brother-in-law of opposite party no. 2 Smt. Dolly @ Gayatri while applicant no. 2 Vishal is their son. The opposite party no. 2 was married with brother of applicant no. 1 but they have divorced each other. It has been submitted that impugned complaint has been filed making false and baseless allegations and even concealing the relationship that applicants are brother- in-law, sister-in-law and nephew of her husband. It was also argued that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application.
There are allegations against the applicants that they caught the complainant and she was given beatings. Her house hold articles were also destroyed. From perusal of the material on record and looking into facts of the case at this stage, it cannot be said that prima facie no case is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in jurisdiction of Section 482 Cr. P.C. It is well settled that at this stage only prime facie case is to be seen. Considering the law laid down by Apex Court in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, material on record and considering the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, no case for quashing of the proceeding is made out.
The prayer as made above is hereby refused.
However, after hearing learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State, this application is finally disposed off with a direction that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law including the 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 applicants surrender in the court, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Courts below within the aforesaid period, coercive action may be taken against them.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 Mohit