Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4811 of 2019
Revisionist :- Rajvanshi Yadav And 2 Ors.
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Revisionist :- Satyendra Bhushan Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the revisionists for quashing the order dated 26.11.2019 passed by C.J.M., Rampur in Criminal Case No. 1645 of 2016, Stte Vs. Rajvanshi Yadav and others, arising out of Case crime NO. 143 of 2018, under section 420, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. P.S. Bilaspur, District Rampur and discharge the revisionists.
As per the allegations made in the F.I.R. it is alleged that revisionists had taken a sum of Rs. 4.00 lacs on the pretext of getting the brother of O.P. No.2 employed, however, the brother of O.P. No.2 was not given any employment, as such O.P. No.2 started demanding for return of the said money, the revisionists did not return back his money and threatened him of life. The application for discharge of the revisionists has also been rejected and N.B.W. has been issued against the revisionists.
The contention of counsel for the revisionists is that no offence against the revisionists is disclosed and the present F.I.R. has been lodged with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.
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 revisionists. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C.
At this stage, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view 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 prayer for quashing the order dated 26.11.2019 is refused.
However, it is directed that if the revisionists appear and surrender before the court below within thirty days from today and apply for bail, their 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 judgement 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 thirty days from today or till the revisionists surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the revisionists. However, in case, the revisionists do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this Crl. Revision is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 R