Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11655 of 2009 Applicant :- Smt. Madhuri Mishra & Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhakar Verdhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,K.D. Tiwari,Pankaj Kumar Yadav,Pramod K. Gupta
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 3.1.2009 and the order dated 3.3.2009 by which the Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance in respect of Case No. 1188 of 2009, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 and 120B I.P.C., Police Station Nebua Naurangia, District Kushi Nagar, pending in the court of C.J.M., Kushi Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the certificates on the basis of which the applicant no. 1 was appointed as Angan Badi Karya Karti are genuine and present prosecution was lodged on motivated conduct of opposite party no. 2 with whom the present applicants has some old and pending disputes. He has referred to certain documents, claiming to be photo-copy of the original certificates issued by the University. It is then submitted that there is no cheating or forgery committed by the applicants.
Learned AGA and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 on the other hand relied on certain copies of documents claimed to have been issued by the authority of the Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi and the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., during the course of the investigation to suggest that at present, it was found that certificates relied upon by the applicant were forged inasmuch, the area Lekhpal as also the Secretary Examination of the University had disputed the genuineness of the certificates relied upon by the applicants.
Upon such factual disputes being raised, it is difficult to reach any conclusion at this stage whether the certificate relied upon by the applicants is genuine or not. Such an exercise would necessarily involve appraisal of evidence and it cannot be done at this stage.
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 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 prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.
However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case 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 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 Supreme Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 21.8.2018 Prakhar