Court No. - 72
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29613 of 2017 Applicant :- Nasruddin And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Alok Singh,Ramendra Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants; Shri Manish Yadav, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Ramendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and; learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 05.06.2017, cognizance order dated 08.08.2017 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3840/9 of 2017 (State Vs. Nasir Kazim & Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No. 357 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 307 IPC and Sections 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Sardhana, District Meerut, pending in the court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.4, Meerut.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the FIR allegations are plainly false and wholly exaggerated against all the applicants. The real dispute is stated to be between Rahees (son of applicant nos. 1 and 2) and daughter of opposite party no.2, arising from matrimonial discord. Therefore, relying on the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr,, (2010) 7 SCC 667 and Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr., (2012) 10 SCC 741, it has been submitted, the present prosecution is liable to be quashed.
4. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the learned AGA, on the other hand, submit that the present is not a usual case of matrimonial discord wherein general and vague allegations have been made against the applicants and their relatives. Referring to the FIR, injury report and other material collected during police investigation, it has been submitted, in the present case, daughter of opposite party no.2 had, amongst others, been assaulted by a sharp weapon which caused various injuries.
5. Read with the statement of the injured, it does appear that this is a case of actual assault wherein specific role of holding/restraining the injured has been assigned to the present applicants.
6. 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 applicants at this stage. 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.
7. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned orders are declined.
8. However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail 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 judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
9. For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants.
10. Also, once the applicants are enlarged on bail, it may be open to them to seek discharge and if such an application is filed, the same may be considered on its own merits, without being influenced by any of the observations made in this order.
11. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 25.4.2019/AHA