Court No. - 50
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11827 of 2017
Applicant :- Ram Gopal Pathak And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amrit Shanker Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the proceedings of case No. 14544 of 2016 arising out of case crime No.391 of 2014 under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC, police station Govind Nagar, district Mathura pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura and also to quash the charge sheet dated 04.7.2015 alongwith the cognizance taking order dated 29.10.2016 passed in the aforesaid case.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the son of the applicants was working in Sahara India who had committed some irregularity for which the applicants are being harassed although, there is nothing on record to connect the applicants with the complicity of the alleged offence. It is contended that as the applicants are parents of the person who had committed irregularity, the applicants are being falsely implicated in spite of the fact that the applicants have disowned their son.
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 applicants. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C.. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 or 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings, charge sheet and order impugned is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid 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 reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 45 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 19.4.2017 faraz