Court No. - 2
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22639 of 2019
Applicant :- Ram Vilas
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr
Counsel for Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Singh,Syed Imran Ibrahim
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Aushim Malhotra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Syed Imran Ibrahim, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vimal Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of charge sheet dated 21.12.2018 registered as Case No. 342 of 2019 (State Vs. Ram Vilas), arising out of Case Crime No. 100 of 2018, under Sections 323, 506, 452, 354 (A) IPC, P.S. Shahaabganj, District Chandauli.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated. The victim had suffered not any serious injury except that she was having complaint of pain. There is delay of 9 days in lodging the F.I.R. The accused has no criminal history, hence quashing is prayed.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing the same.
As per F.I.R., the opposite party no. 3 has been tried to be molested by the accused-applicant and when she tried to defend herself, she was beaten with fists & kicks and when the mother- in-law of the victim had arrived, she was also pushed off. After investigation charge sheet has been submitted, therefore proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the evidence which has been gathered by the Investigating Officer cannot be scrutinized.
The arguments made by the learned counsel for the applicant relates to the factual aspect of the matter, which cannot be seen at this stage in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C., as the same would require trial.
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 applicant. 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 applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his 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 applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally
disposed of.
Order Date :- 14.6.2019
A.P. Pandey