Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 30.10.2018 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 18.01.2019 and entire proceedings of Case No. 477 of 2019 (State vs. Lalji @ Shireesh Agarwal) under Sections 323, 504, 506, 457 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Rudauli, District Faizabad.
The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. It is contended that cognizance taken by learned C.J.M. on the charge sheet is bad in law inasmuch as the court has taken cognizance for offence u/s 295A and it is mandatory that u/s 196 Cr.P.C. which debar any court to take cognizance without prior sanction of State Government or concerned authority.
Per contra learned A.G.A. Submitted that 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. The submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant relate to disputed question of facts, 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. The applicant is at liberty to raise all points at the time of framing charge or may claim discharge in accordance with law.
The submissions made by learned A.G.A. have force.
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 :- 26.11.2019 shravan