Court No. - 53
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23114 of 2018 Applicant :- Rana Shahi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA appearing for the State.
This application has been filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.754 of 2016-State Vs. Rana Shahi & Ors. (arising out of Case Crime No.181 of 2015), under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, PS Gagaha, District Gorakhpur pending in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge (SD)-I, Gorakhpur.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the impugned proceedings have been brought maliciously in order to exert oblique pressure upon the applicants into withdrawing from prosecution of Case Crime No.368 of 2014, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, PS Gagaha, District Gorakhpur where the date of occurrence is the same as the one in the FIR filed by the applicants, that is to say, 28.11.2014. It is submitted that in the FIR registered at the instance of the applicants promptly, a charge sheet has been submitted on 21.10.2015 wherein cognizance has been taken on 16.02.2016 and Criminal Case No.754 of 2016 is pending before the Competent Court. It is submitted that the present prosecution has been brought to coerce the applicants into withdrawing from prosecution of the last mentioned case that was promptly lodged after the occurrence. It is pointed out that this fact is evident from the highly belated FIR that was lodged ten months after the occurrence through proceedings under Section 156(3) CrPC.
Learned AGA who has filed a counter affidavit today, and which has been taken on record, has opposed the motion to admit this application to hearing.
Having considered the submissions on both sides this Court is of opinion that it appears to be a case where there has been some kind of a physical engagement between the two sides where both sides have sustained injuries. It may be true that the applicants have reported the matter to the police earlier and after investigation have been found vindicated by the police and both cases are now before the concerned court seized of the matter to try it in accordance with law.
Looking to the fact that there are injuries sustained by the other side also, it is not a case where this Court may interfere in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC. This is not to say that the allegations of one side are true or of the other side false. All that has to be done by the Trial Court which shall evaluate evidence led at the trial. However, no case for quashing the impugned proceedings is made out.
The prayer for quashing the impugned proceedings is, therefore, refused.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before court below within 45 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by the Hon'ble Supreme 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 applicants surrender 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.
It is further provided that in case the applicants make an application for discharge at the appropriate stage the same shall be considered in accordance with law uninfluenced by anything said in this order.
With the aforesaid directions, the application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.7.2018 Shahroz