Court No. - 65
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29128 of 2019
Applicant :- Naredra Singh @ Mulayam Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 Sri Birendra Singh Singraur has filed his Vakalatnama and the same is taken on record.
Heard Sri Sushil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Birendra Singh Singraur, learned counsel for Opposite Party No. 2, and Sri G. P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This Application has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 2641 of 2019 (State Vs. Kuldeep @ Anshu and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 19 of 2019, under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Bagwala, District Etah as well as charge sheet no. 97 of 2019 dated 07.06.2019 and cognizance order dated 01.07.2019, pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 17, Etah.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is father-in-law of the daughter of Opposite Party No. 2. The Opposite Party No. 2 has implicated the accused applicant falsely in this case as no such occurrence has ever taken place. It is further argued that in statement of victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has made allegations of molestation against her jeth but when she gave her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she made allegations of rape against her father-in-law i.e. accused applicant, therefore, her testimony is unbelievable. The accused applicant and his family has been falsely implicated just to put pressure upon them. It is further argued that the police has not made proper investigation in this case and submitted the charge-sheet in routine manner which is nothing but malicious prosecution of the accused which needs to be quashed.
Learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2. and learned A.G.A.
have vehemently opposed the prayer of quashing. I have gone through the F.I.R.
It is mentioned in the F.I.R. that the daughter of the Opposite Party no. 2 was married to son of the applicant on 28.02.2016. Even after spending Rs. 10,00,000/- in the marriage, the applicant did not get satisfaction and further demand of dowry was made. Soon thereafter, the daughter of the Opposite Party No. 2 was started to be harassed. The elder brother of her husband and her father-in-law often used to beat and molest her daughter regarding which the victim had disclosed to the Opposite Party no.2. After investigation made by the police, charge sheet was submitted. The statements which have been recorded by the I.O. cannot be disbelieved at this stage in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The arguments which are made by the learned counsel for the applicant are related to factual aspect which cannot be seen at this stage in the proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
However, the applicant may approach the trial court to seek discharge, if so advised, and before the said forum, he may raise all the pleas which have been taken by him here. If such application is made, the same shall be decided by the trial court in accordance with. The committal court shall commit the case within 15 days subject to compliance of provision of Section 209 Cr.P.C. to facilitate the trial court to hear and dispose of discharge application.
The applicant may appear before committal court within 15 days to get his case committed to the Court of Sessions so that the accused may move discharge application before it. For a period of 15 days from the date of order, no coercive action shall be taken. But if the accused does not appear before the Committal court, the said court shall take coercive steps to procure his attendance.
With aforesaid direction, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 VPS