Court No. - 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6891 of 2018 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nikhil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Firdos Ahmad,K.K. Yadav
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 329 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Shahganj, District Jaunpur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-1st, Jaunpur.
This Court vide its order dated 28.02.2018 has referred the matter to the Mediation Centre in order to enable the parties to reach an amicable settlement, however, Mediation Centre vide its report dated 05.09.2018 has reported that the parties could not reach to any settlement and the mediation has failed.
As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that the Opposite Party No.2 was married to applicant on 10.02.2012, however, after the said marriage, applicant started demanding additional dowry and for non- fulfillment of demand of additional dowry, he used to torture, maltreat, assault her and also threaten her of life and she was also turned out of her matrimonial home.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, 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 complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant and as such, entire proceedings 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 entire proceedings is therefore refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicant appears/surrenders before the court below within 45 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of 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 in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).
For a period of 45 days from today or till the applicant surrenders and applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 Nadim