Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1812 of 2019 Applicant :- Raheesh And 11 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.
The present application has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No. 4149 of 2018 (State vs Raheesh and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 700 of 2018, under sections 147, 149, 336, 504, 307 IPC, and section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1934, PS Baghpat, District Baghpat pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat as well as the charge sheet dated 12.08.2018 and coginzance order dated 10.09.2018.
Learned counsel for the applicants contends that the applicants have nothing to do with the alleged crime. He further contends that certain other persons were involved in stone pelting on the police party and the applicants have falsely been roped in the present case. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the Investigating Officer has not conducted investigation in fair manner and charge sheet has been submitted against the applicants. The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants 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 applicants. 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, charge sheet and cognizance order is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within a period of 30 days from today and apply for bail, then their prayer for bail shall be considered in accordance with law.
The applicants have a liberty to move an application for discharge before the court below.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 25.1.2019 Sazia