Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42596 of 2018 Applicant :- Mohsin Khan And 2 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Sharique Ahmed Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ved Prakash Vaish,J.
Vakalatnama, filed on behalf of opposite party no.2, is taken on record.
Present Shri Sharique Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Sanjay Sharma, learned AGA for the State and Shri Shiv Sharan Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 - complainant.
This is an application under section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash criminal proceedings of Case No. 2604 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 303 of 2016, under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act (State Vs. Mohsin and Others), Police Station - Akrabad, District - Aligarh.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the marriage between the daughter of opposite party no. 2 and applicant no. 1 was solemnized on 20.10.2014, applicant no. 2 is brother-in-law (Dewar) and applicant no. 3 is mother-in-law of the wife of applicant no. 1. The applicants alleged that they have falsely implicated in this case. No offence is made out from the allegations made in the complaint. The counsel for the applicants has also pointed out that initially the first information report was registered against 9 persons and the allegations of offence under section 307 IPC was also levelled, but during investigation, the Investigating Officer found that the offence under section 307 IPC is not made out and no case was made out against 6 accused persons named in the first information report, as charge sheet was filed against 3 accused persons, who are the present applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicants has drawn attention of this Court to the medical certificate of injured, Shabana Parveen, which is Annexure No. 19, the same shows that she was medically examined at Zila Malkhan Singh Hospital, Aligarh, while OPD Ticket number is 38293. He has also pointed out that the applicants moved an application under RTI Act (page 162) and as per the information received under RTI Act, the injured, Shabana, was not medically examined in the said hospital, while on the said OPD Ticket No. 38293, one child Sonu was medically examined. He has also pointed out that another application under RTI Act was filed by the applicants seeking list of all patients, who were medically examined on 21.11.2016 and 22.11.2016 and the reply to the said application shows that there is some manipulation. According to the learned counsel for the applicants, the same manipulation is also clear from the statement of the Doctor.
Prayer for quashing the charge sheet has been opposed by the learned AGA for the State by submitting that there are specific allegations against the applicants and there is no ground for quashing the charge sheet.
Shri S.S. Tripathi, Advocate for the complainant/opposite party no. 2 submits that all these grounds taken by the applicants are matter of trial and cannot be considered at this stage.
I have carefully examined the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and carefully perused the material on record.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. In my view, the submissions made by learned counsel for applicants relate to disputed questions of facts and the same can not be adjudicated upon at this stage in the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. The submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants are matter of defence.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case titled as 'R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab' A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, 'State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal' 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, 'Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another', 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 (Para-10) has observed that at the stage of congnizance, only prima-facie case has to be seen.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, I do not find any ground to quash the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case and the same is declined.
However, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in another case titled as 'Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh versus State of U.P. and others' 2009 Sup AIR (SC) 2178 and judgment of this Court titled as 'Amarawati and another versus State of U.P.' 2004 (57) ALR 290, the applicants are directed to appear and surrender before the learned court concerned within 30 days from today in the aforementioned case and move an appropriate applications for discharge and bail. The learned trial court will consider the said applications in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. After obtaining bail by the applicants, the applicants may move an application for exemption and the trial court will consider the same.
No coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case for a period of 30 days or till the application filed by the applicants is decided, whichever is earlier. In case, the applicants fail to appear before the court concerned within the aforesaid period, the interim order shall stand vacated.
With the aforesaid observations, the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.11.2018 Amit Mishra