Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28653 of 2019 Applicant :- Raju And Another Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Rajpoot Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the impugned Charge-Sheet dated 02.05.2018 and cognizance order dated 08.06.2018 in Special Sessions Trial No.109 of 2018 (State Vs. Raju and others), arising out of Case Crime No.45 of 2018, under Sections 147, 452, 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2) (V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Duriya Kala, District Pilibhit.
As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that in respect of the dispute, on 10.03.2018 and 11.03.2018, the applicants abused the victim with the name of his caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate him and when he asked him to refrain from abusing, then the applicants forcibly entered in his house and assaulted him with Banka, due to which, he suffered injuries and has been medically examined.
Learned counsel for the applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants and as such, impugned charge-sheet 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 cognizance order is therefore refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail, their 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 :- 25.7.2019 Nadim