Court No. - 82
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28841 of 2019 Applicant :- Netrapal And Another Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Verma,Ajit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Shri. Ajit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.
This application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C with request to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 595 of 2019 (State Vs. Netrapal and others) arising out of Charge Sheet dated 28.02.2019 in relation to NCR 79 of 2015 under Section 323, 504 I.P.C, Police Station Gabhana, District Aligarh pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.5, Aligarh.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that in respect of the same incident one F.I.R, being Case Crime No. 330 of 2015 was registered under Section 147, 148, 452, 323, 504, 325, 427 I.P.C and after investigation charge sheet was submitted for the offences under Section 323, 504 against applicants. N.C.R was also registered in respect to same offence under Section 323,504 I.P.C and after the filing of the charge- sheet in the above case and after the applicants were released on bail, an application was given under Section 155(2) Cr.P.C for permission of investigation and thereupon the learned Magistrate vide order dated 03.12.2018 directed the concerned S.O to investigate N.C.R No. 79 of 2015. After investigation in that case also charge-sheet was submitted against the applicants for the offences under Section 323,504 I.P.C.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that both the cases are in respect of one incident and two charge- sheets have been filed which is not legal and the charge-sheet subsequently filed is liable to be quashed.
From perusal of the order which have been annexed at page 35 passed by the learned Magistrate on 03.12.2018, it appears that Magistrate directed for investigation in the N.C.R finding that both the incidents were different and F.I.R was lodged at different time by different informants and some additional accused persons. In such a situation, it appears appropriate that the applicants should have given application before the same court pointing out this fact and request for passing a suitable order in this matter, instead of approaching to this Court. When a legal remedy is available by filing application before the concerned Magistrate attracting the attention of the Magistrate regarding this anomaly the application should have been filed before the learned Magistrate. In application under Section 482 Cr.P.C, it is not possible to enter into factual controversy and into the detail appreciation of the evidence. That responsibility lies with the trial court, therefore, I do not find any reason to quash the said proceeding. The application has got no force.
Therefore the application is disposed of with direction to the applicants to file the relevant application before the concerned court and make a suitable request in respect of his grievance.
Order Date :- 26.7.2019 PS