Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16268 of 2021
Applicant :- Ram Asre Chauhan And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that four persons have beaten the injured, Manisha and there is only one injury sustained by her on left side of forehead 6 cm. above the left eye. He further submitted that F.I.R. has been lodged after due deliberation after two days of alleged incident. Whole prosecution case is unbelievable, hence charge-sheet dated 7.09.2018 and cognizance order dated 26.06.2020 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 11, Azamgarh in Case No. 1498 of 2020, State Vs. Ram Asre Chauhan and others arising out of Case Crime No. 156 of 2018 under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 452 I.P.C. P.S. Bardah District, Azamgarh be quashed.
Per-contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the above contentions and submitted that these are disputed questions of fact which can be determined only by the trial court as this Court cannot enquire into the aforesaid facts.
In M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharastra and Others, 2020 SCC Online SC 850, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held:
"iv) The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection, as it has been observed, in the rarest of rare case (not to be confused with the formation in the context of death penalty).
v) While examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of which is sought, the Court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR/complaint;
vi) Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial stage;
vii) Quashing of a complaint/FIR should be an exception rather than an ordinary rule."
Following other authorities can be cited on the aforesaid point:
R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9.
All the submissions made at the Bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C.
In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that learned trial court be directed to dispose of the bail application of the applicants in light of the Judgement of this Court passed in Brahm Singh and Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 15699 of 2016.
Learned trial court is expected to abide by the judgement of Brahm Singh and Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others while considering the bail application of the applicants.
With this direction, the present Application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 20.9.2021
A. Mandhani