Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 24.09.2015, summoning order dated 03.08.2016 and further proceedings of Case No. 3425 of 2016 (State Vs. Srichand and others) and bailable warrant order dated 17.07.2019 in Case No. 26 of 2018 (State Vs. Pramod @ Ramraj), arising out of Case Crime No.416 of 2015, under Sections 308, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Sarai Akil, District Kaushambi.
As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that on 09.09.2015 at about 4:00 PM, the applicant abused the victims with the name of their caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate them and when asked to refrain from abusing, the applicant assaulted the victims, due to which, as many as four persons have suffered injuries and they have been medically examined.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, no offence is disclosed against the applicants and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and further, there is no explanation on behalf of the applicants for laches in filing the present application under Section 482 CrPC, as such, impugned summoning order cannot be quashed.
Moreover, all the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CrPC. At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the summoning order and entire proceedings is therefore refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as expeditiously as possible after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.
With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.8.2019 Nadim