Court No. - 83
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28531 of 2019 Applicant :- Ram Niwas And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 130 of 2013, Smt. Munni Devi Vs. Mamta Devi and another, under sections 380, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Shahganj, District Agra pending in Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4 Agra.
The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contentions. It was pointed out that applicant no.2 is sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of opposite party no.2 and the matter pertains to domestic dispute and the allegations made in the complaint are concocted and false and do not disclose commission of offence.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the fact of the case at this stage, it cannot be said that prima facie no case is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in jurisdiction of Section 482 Cr. P.C. It is well settled that at this stage only prime case is to be seen. Considering the law laid down by Apex Court in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, material on record and considering the submissions of learned counsel for the applicants, no case for quashing of the proceeding is made out.
The prayer for quashing as made above is hereby refused. However, it is directed that in case applicants appear and surrender before the courts below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously on its own merits in accordance with law including law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 and judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
With the aforesaid direction, the application is disposed off finally.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 T.S.