Court No. - 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46640 of 2019 Applicant :- Maya Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing of the charge-sheet dated 06.05.2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.26001 of 2018 (State Vs. Maya Shukla and others) arising out of Case Crime No.35 of 2017, under Sections 420, 416, 467, 468, 470, 471, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Swaroop Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of learned A.C.M.M. Ist, Kanpur Nagar.
As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that Opposite Party No.2 had been paying installments in respect of E.W.S. House bearing House No.1700/1850 Arra Bingwan, Police Station Bidhnu, District Kanpur Nagar, which was allotted by K.D.A. in favour of Opposite Party No.2. However, subsequently by impersonation, the applicant surreptitiously got the said plot registered in the name of Meera Devi.
The contention of counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present application has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.
Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant and as such, charge-sheet as well the entire proceedings cannot be quashed.
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 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 charge-sheet as well the entire proceedings is refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within thirty days from today and apply for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).
For a period of thirty 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 do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid directions, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 Zafar