Court No. - 48
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3756 of 2017 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Agarwal And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anoop Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Pundir,Rekha Pundir
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of charge sheet dated 09.12.2016 as well as the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.526 of 2016, u/s 147, 148, 352, 307, 323, 325, 332, 353, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Transport Nagar, District- Meerut, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut.
Heard Shri Vibhu Rai, Advocate holding brief of Shri Anoop Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party and learned AGA. Perused the record.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that there was a background of hostility with the applicants and the victim and the victim had misbehaved with the girls. A complaint in that regard was moved on behalf of girls which was forwarded to the higher authorities as a result of which the victim was attached to a different institution. Submission is that it is because of this background that the victim has falsely implicated the applicants in the case.
The law regarding sufficiency of material which may justify the summoning of accused and also the court's decision to proceed against him in a given case is well settled. The court has to eschew itself from embarking upon a roving enquiry into the last details of the case. It is also not advisable to adjudge whether the case shall ultimately end in conviction or not. Only a prima facie satisfaction of the court about the existence of sufficient ground to proceed in the matter is required.
Through a catena of decisions given by Hon'ble Apex Court this legal aspect has been expatiated upon at length and the law that has evolved over a period of several decades is too well settled. The cases of (1) Chandra Deo Singh Vs. Prokash Chandra Bose AIR 1963 SC 1430 , (2) Vadilal Panchal Vs. Dattatraya Dulaji Ghadigaonker AIR 1960 SC 1113 and (3) Smt. Nagawwa Vs. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi 1976 3 SCC 736 may be usefully referred to in this regard.
The Apex Court decisions given in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866 and in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC(Cr.) 426 have also recognized certain categories by way of illustration which may justify the quashing of a complaint or charge sheet. Some of them are akin to the illustrative examples given in the above referred case of Smt. Nagawwa Vs.
Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi 1976 3 SCC 736. The cases where the allegations made against the accused or the evidence collected by the Investigating Officer do not constitute any offence or where the allegations are absurd or extremely improbable impossible to believe or where prosecution is legally barred or where criminal proceeding is malicious and malafide instituted with ulterior motive of grudge and vengeance alone may be the fit cases for the High Court in which the criminal proceedings may be quashed. Hon'ble Apex Court in Bhajan Lal's case has recognized certain categories in which Section-482 of Cr.P.C. or Article-226 of the Constitution may be successfully invoked.
Illumined by the case law referred to herein above, this Court has adverted to the entire record of the case.
The allegations as transpired on the record reveals that a deadly assault was made upon the victim by a number of persons including applicants causing him several injuries. The victim was admitted in a nursing home and the medical examination of the victim shows that he was admitted in an unconscious condition with low blood pressure and symptoms of vomiting. The symptoms were found to be consistent with serious head injuries. The fracture of occipital bone was also seen. So far as the defence pleas about the false implication is concerned it is difficult at this stage to act upon the same as the injuries caused to the victim are too serious to be ignored. It is not difficult to see that the assault has been definitely made upon the victim. As to who has been rightly implicated or who has been falsely implicated and whether the accused are the right culprits or any of them is innocent are all matters to be sifted during the course of proper trial and it will not be proper for this court in exercise of this jurisdiction to give finding in that regard.
A threadbare discussion of various facts and circumstances, as they emerge from the allegations made against the accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. But it shall suffice to observe that the perusal of the F.I.R. and the material collected by the Investigating Officer on the basis of which the charge sheet has been submitted makes out a prima facie case against the accused at this stage and I do not find any justification to quash the charge sheet or the proceedings against the applicants arising out of them as the case does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Apex Court which may justify their quashing.
The prayer for quashing the same is refused as I do not see any abuse of the Court's process either.
The interim order, if any, is vacated.
However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case after surrendering in the court below an application for bail is moved on behalf of the accused within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.
In the aforesaid period or till the date of appearance of the accused in the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken or given effect to.
It is clarified that this order has been passed only with regard to the accused on behalf of whom this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved in this Court.
With the aforesaid observations this application is finally disposed off.
In the last the counsel has submitted that the applicants desire to seek their discharge and for that a liberty may be granted to him.
In this regard it may be observed that under the statutory scheme of law there is a stage where the Court decides upon the appropriateness of framing the charge against the accused after hearing them or pass order of discharge. If under appropriate section at appropriate stage the applicants move before the court below seeking their discharge it is expected that the court shall adjudicate upon the same in accordance with law. For this purpose no additional judicial order is required.
Order Date :- 14.9.2018 shiv