Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46538 of 2019
Applicant :- Ram Milan And 4 Ors
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Prasad Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Surendra Prasad Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri B.A. Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 16.04.2019 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/F.T.C.-IInd, Siddharthnagar in S.T. No. 50 of 2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 195 of 2015 under Sections 147, 148, 336, 325, 504, 506 and 308 I.P.C., Police Station, Itwa, District, Siddharthnagar.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated by O.P. No.2. No such occurrence has ever taken place. Learned counsel for the applicants further stated that if proceedings are allowed to continue, that would amount to an abuse of process of court.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing.
I have gone through the F.I.R.
As per F.I.R., accused applicants are stated to have caused injuries to the complainant side in which four injured have received injuries in which one of them has received serious injury. Charge-sheet has been submitted after investigation in this case and the statement which has been recorded, their truthfulness cannot be disbelieved at this stage under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The arguments which are made by the learned counsel for the applicants are related to factual aspect which cannot be seen at this stage in the proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of 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. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail may 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 judgement 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 30 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 :- 18.12.2019
A. Mandhani