Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1834 of 2019 Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Pathak,Rakesh Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.
By means of this application under section 482 Cr.P.C. the applicant has prayed for quashing the charge sheet dated 22.03.2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 1792 of 2018 (State vs Pawan Kumar Pandey) arising out of Case Crime No. 45 of 2018, under section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, PS Bansi, District Siddharth Nagar pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siddharth Nagar.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has falsely been implicated in this case with malafide intention to harass the applicant. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has fairly distributed the essential commodities to the card-holders and he has no concern with the alleged crime. The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contentions.
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 relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482, Cr.P.C. At this stage only a prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing of the proceedings and the charge sheet is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within a period of one month from today and applies for bail, then his prayer for bail shall be considered in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 25.1.2019 Sazia