Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32553 of 2019 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Rai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Aslam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
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 order dated 04.02.2019 and charge-sheet dated 22.11.2018 as well as entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No.06 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No.232 of 2018, under Sections 332, 353, 427, 186, 504, 506, 323 IPC and Section 3(1)(da) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Dohrighat, District Mau.
As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that the victim is a government servant and he had gone for delimitation of chak road, where the applicant abused him with the name of his caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate him in public view and torn the maps of different sites.
Learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant 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 applicant and as such, impugned 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 charge-sheet as well as impugned order proceedings is therefore refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicant appears/surrenders before the court below and applies for bail, his 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