Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46540 of 2019 Applicant :- Raghuveer And 2 Ors Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shabeena Begum,Ashiyam Nasir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Abhinav Kumar Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ashiyam Nasir, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 13.07.2018 in Case No. 1277 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No.292 of 2018 (State vs. Raghuveer and others) under sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Gajraula, District Amroha and also a prayer is made to stay the proceedings in this case till the disposal of this application.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that there is a dispute of land between two sides regarding which the applicants have filed civil suit no. 500 of 2017, which is pending before the court below and the opposite party no. 2 is not filing written statement in the said case. Only to pressurize the applicants, this false case has been slapped against them, which is nothing but a malicious prosecution, which needs to be quashed as no such occurrence has taken place.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the charge sheet.
I have gone through the FIR. It is recorded in it that on 23.3.2018 at about 7.00 A.M. that is much after filing the civil suit, the accused applicants are stated to have abused, beaten and threatened to kill the opposite party no. 2 and the wife of the informant is also said to have been molested as her clothes were torn. After lodging of this FIR, investigation was done and charge sheet has been submitted. The argument made by the learned counsel for the applicants that it is a counter-blast of the civil suit is a matter of evidence and cannot be determined at this stage.
After investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer after having recorded statements of as many as seven witnesses. The veracity of the said witnesses cannot be tested in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. From the evidence on record, it cannot be said that cognizable offence is not made out against the accused-applicant.
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 and 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 of the aforesaid case is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid-down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 45 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With aforesaid direction, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 AU