Court No. - 48
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39250 of 2018 Applicant :- Mohd Yaseen Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
Shri Pranjal Mehrotra, Advocate has filed his power on behalf of opposite party no.2 which is taken on record.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of the charge sheet dated 18.04.2018 as well as further proceeding arising out of no. 362 of 2017, under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, P.S.- Pakbada, District- Moradabad.
Heard Shri Ram Chandra, Advocate holding brief of Shri Rakesh Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned AGA.
Entire record has been perused.
While exercising the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or while wielding the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the quashing of the criminal proceedings can be done only if it does not disclose any offence or if there is any legal bar which prohibits the proceedings on its basis. The Apex Court decisions in R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866 and State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC(Cr.) 426 make the position of law in this regard clear recognizing certain categories by way of illustration which may justify the quashing of a complaint or charge sheet.
Illumined by the case law referred to herein above, this Court has adverted to the entire record of the case.
A threadbare discussion of various facts and circumstances, as they emerge from the allegations made against the accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. But it shall suffice to observe that the perusal of the F.I.R. and the material collected by the Investigating Officer on the basis of which the charge sheet has been submitted makes out a prima facie case against the accused at this stage and there appear to be sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. I do not find any justification to quash the charge sheet or the proceedings against the applicants arising out of them as the case does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Apex Court which may justify their quashing.
The prayer for quashing the same is refused as I do not see any abuse of the Court's process either.
However, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel that the above mentioned offences are compoundable and the accused is ready to deposit the compounding amount, it is directed that in case an application is moved before the court concerned within 30 days from today for compounding the offence, the court below shall look into the same. If the court finds that the offence is such which may be lawfully compounded, the authority concerned or the competent representative of the concerned department of electricity shall be summoned by the court within 30 days thereafter for the purpose of submitting the compounding report. The authority or the department concerned shall submit the compounding report within 30 days thereafter. If the report is such that the matter can be finally adjudicated on the basis of the payment of the compounding amount, the accused shall be required by the court to deposit the compounding amount within 30 days after submission of the aforesaid report, and the concerned court shall thereupon pass necessary orders in accordance with law. If the compounding amount has already been deposited, then the Court shall duly consider this fact and shall pass necessary orders in accordance with law keeping the same fact in perspective.
No coercive measures shall be taken or given effect to in the aforesaid period of four months or till the disposal of the case, whichever is earlier.
If for some reason the case is not decided on the basis of compounding, the court concerned shall proceed against the accused in accordance with law and may take all legal measures to procure his attendance.
It is made clear that no application for extension of time shall be entertained if this order is not availed by the accused in the stipulated period of time.
It is further clarified that for the present this order has been passed only with regard to the accused on behalf of whom this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved in this Court.
With the aforesaid observations this application is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 shiv