Court No. - 20
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6248 of 2019 Applicant :- Manish Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Girja Shankar Prajapati Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing charge sheet dated 21.6.2018 bearing its No.01 of 2018 and the entire proceedings of Case No.935 of 2018 (State vs. Ram Gopal and others) arising out of Case Crime No.25 of 2018, under sections 323, 504 and 308 IPC, Police Station Aung, District Fatehpur pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehpur.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Allegations levelled against the applicant is false and fabricated; no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. The brief facts of the case are that on 24.9.2017, opposite party No.2, his son Praveen and one Lavkush s/o Ram Shankar had beaten the father of applicant due to dispute of Khoonta, father of the applicant received grievous injury caused by aforesaid persons, therefore, applicant's father made a complaint in P.S. Aung, which was registered as N.C.R. No.65 of 2017. He further submits that for making cross case as well as due to counter blast, opposite party No.2 on 24.9.2017 obtained medical report from Health Centre Gopalganj, District Fatehpur in which the injuries were found simple in nature. He further submits that with malafide intention to safe their skin, opposite party No.2 further obtain medical/injury report and X-Ray report from the District Hospital, Fatehpur on 28.9.2017. He further submits that without conducting proper inquiry, Investigating Officer submitted the charge- sheet against the applicant and on the basis of same, learned court below passed cognizance order against the applicant on 16.10.2018, which is not sustainable in the eye of law.
Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer of the applicant.
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 submission made at the bar 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.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the cognizance order, entire proceedings of the aforesaid trial, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
In the last learned counsel for applicant prayed that some protection be granted to the applicant in case he surrenders before the concerned court and further prayed that this court may please to direct the trial court to follow the directions passed in matter of Amarawati Versus State of U.P reported in 2005 Cri LJ 755 (All) as well directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Versus State of UP and Ors reported in 2009 (4) SCC,437.
The directions given by the Full Bench of this Court in Amarawati (Supra) as well as directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh (Supra) which are on the issue of (I) to follow the directions passed by Hon'ble Supreme in the matter of Joginder Kumar Versus State of UP reported in 1994 (4) SCC,260, (II) Trial Court to take all endeavour to decide a bail application preferably on the same day and (III) to grant interim bail in appropriate cases pending disposal of final bail application, are very explicit and to be followed mandatorily in letter and spirit.
A copy of the said judgments have already been circulated to all the district courts of State of Uttar Pradesh under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court, therefore to repeat such direction by way of another order from this Court is neither necessary nor warranted.
In case appropriate application is filed, by the applicant, the trial court shall decided the same strictly in accordance with law.
I have already rejected the prayer of the applicant for quashing the charge- sheet and other prayers sought in the present application being sans merit, however considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is directed that in case the applicant surrenders before the concerned trial court within 30 days from today and apply for bail, the trial court will decide the bail application in accordance with law.
For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.
It is made clear that no further protection on any ground what so ever will be granted beyond the period above mentioned and in case applicants choose not to surrender within 30 days from today, the trial court is directed to take all the coercive measures in accordance with law against him.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is disposed off.
Order Date :- 22.2.2019 Rishabh
(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.)