Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46528 of 2019
Applicant :- Ritesh Umar And 3 Ors
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Prakash Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Sri A.P. Tiwari, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of O.P. No. 2 and the same is taken on record.
Heard Sri Shri Prakash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri A.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 and Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing the entire proceeding as well as charge- sheet dated 15.04.2019 in Case No. 2833 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 0040 of 2019 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 427, 352, 325 and 452 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali City, District Mirzapur.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated. 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 counsel for the O.P. No. 2 and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing.
I have gone through the F.I.R.
It is recorded in F.I.R. that accused applicants are stated to have entered into the house O.P. No. 2 and have beaten him and his family members and in all, three persons have received serious injuries.
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 :- 17.12.2019
A. Mandhani