Court No. - 50
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29691 of 2018
Applicant :- Munna @ Jai Krishan And 3 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Dharmendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned discharge order dated 16.07.2018 passed in Complaint Case No. 1961 of 2014 (Anil Kumar vs. Munna @ Jai Kishan and others), under section 323, 325, 452, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Phafund, District Auraiya pending before the C.J.M., Auraiya.
Learned counsel for the applicants contends that applicants have been falsely implicated in complaint case No. 1961 of 2014 and vide impugned order dated 16.07.2018 the learned Magistrate has wrongly rejected their application for discharge; that the civil suit no. 185 of 2009 is pending between the father of opposite party no. 2 and applicants; that the dispute is of civil nature and opposite party no. 2 has filed a false complaint case; that the injury report does not show any grievous injury to Anil Kumar opposite party no. 2; that the impugned order dated 16.07.2018 is wrong and illegal and is liable to be set aside and by allowing the discharge application of applicant, they are liable to be discharge.
Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer and contended that civil suit was filed by father of opposite party no. 2 against applicant no. 3 as well as father of applicant no. 1; that the earlier the applicants have moved Application U/S 482 No. 16028 of 2015 for quashing the proceedings of complaint case as well as summoning order which was refused by this Court vide order dated 31.07.2015.
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 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.
In view of discussions made above, I have come to the conclusion that learned counsel for the applicant has failed to show that there is any abuse of process of court or likelihood of miscarriage of justice for prevention of which the exercise of inherent powers by this Court is required. The application is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.
The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly dismissed.
However, if the applicant nos. 1 to 4 appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail the same shall be considered and decided 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 judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Order Date :- 25.9.2018 /Bhanu