Court No. - 88
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13908 of 2021 Applicant :- Madanlal And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Tripathi,Ashok Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred seeking quashing the cognizance order dated 16.8.2018 and bailable warrants dated 27.8.2020, 27.11.2020 and 6.2.2021 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.3296 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No.0230 of 2018 (State Vs. Mandanlal and others) under Sections 147, 504, 506, 323 and 354 IPC, P.S. Hathras Kotwali, District Hathras.
The contention of counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present case has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.
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 applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings, cognizance & summoning order and charge sheet is refused.
After arguing the case for quite some time at length, learned counsel for the applicants himself has given up to address the Court on merits of the case and prayed, that the purpose of his clients would suffice, if a direction may be given to the courts below to decide their bail application within specific time frame.
However, it is directed, that in case applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail the court below shall consider and decide the bail prayer of applicants expeditiously in accordance with law.
With the above directions, present application is disposed off. Order Date :- 21.9.2021 S. Singh