By moving the present application under section 482 Cr.P.C., charge sheet dated 20.102013 and proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10144 of 2013 (State vs Umesh Gangwar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 808 of 2013, under sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, PS Kotwali, district Bareilly pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly have been prayed to be quashed.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
It has been argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR, his name has appeared in the statement of the co-accused.
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. All the submissions made, relates to the disputed question 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 disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
No case for quashing the charge sheet and proceedings is made out and as such the prayer is declined.
However, it is hereby ordered that if the applicant appears before the court concerned within a period of thirty days from today along with the certified copy of the present order and applies for bail, then his prayer for bail shall be considered and disposed of in view of the settled law laid down by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another vs. State of U.P., 2004 (57) ALR-290 and the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh vs. State of U.P., reported in 2009 (4) SCC 437, after hearing the public prosecutor.
For a period of thirty days from today, 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 and no protection of this order shall be available to him.
The applicant shall also have the option for claiming his discharge at proper stage of the trial.
It is being made clear that the Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the subordinate court shall exercise its independent discretion in deciding the application for bail.
With the aforesaid observation/direction, the application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 18.2.2014 Sumaira