Court No. - 51
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6512 of 2018
Applicant :- Meena Srivastava
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Tiwary,Ashwini Kumar Awasthi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Daya Shankar Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet No.27C dated 31.12.2001 arising out of case crime no.131 of 1995 under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 13 (1) Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Chitbadagaon, District Ballia.
Contention of Sri Manish Tiwary, learned counsel for the applicant is that in the present case an F.I.R. was lodged on 26.12.1995. Thereafter, charge sheet has been filed after great delay on 31.12.2001. The said charge sheet was challenged by other co-accused Bhagwati Prasad Srivastava by filing application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.8387 of 2002 before this Court in which the entire proceedings of the case has been stayed. He has further contended that during pendency of the said application, co-accused Bhagwati Prasad Srivastava has expired in the year 2010 and in view of the death of the applicant, the said application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was finally disposed of. He further contended that thereafter, learned court below again started proceedings and issued non-bailable warrnat against the applicant. Thus, application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed before this Court.
Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant is a woman and she has no previous criminal history. He further submitted that she has been falsely implicated in the present case solely on the basis of conjunctures and surmises. He further submitted that no specific role of forgery has been assigned to the applicant and main role of forgery has been assigned to co- accused Prem Shankar and Urimla Srivastava. He next contended that entire proceedings are malafide.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, offence in question is not a cognizable offence and applicant is a woman and no specific role has been assigned to the applicant, accordingly, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, with liberty to the applicant to appear and surrender before the courts below. Thus, it is directed that in case, the applicant appears and surrenders before the courts below within 45 days from today, her prayer for bail shall be considered and decided on its own merits, if possible on the same day, 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 Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 45 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 does not appear before the courts below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against her.
With the aforesaid direction, the application U/s 482 is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018 atul