Court No. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3766 of 2018
Revisionist :- Saadat And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Nazrul Islam Jafri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A.
By means of the present criminal revision the revisionist has made a prayer for quashing the impugned judgment and order dated 01.10.2018 passed by Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut in Criminal Case No. 635 of 2018 (State Vs. Mujeeb) Case Crime No. 635 of 2018, u/s 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 506, 34 IPC, P.S. Nauchandi, District Meerut, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut.
The contention of the counsel for the revisionists is that no offence against the revisionists is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the revisionists. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. Sri N.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the revisionists has raised a plea of alibi that at the relevant point of time, the revisionists were performing namaz at the masjid. This plea of alibi cannot be appreciated at the stage of 482 Cr.P.C. Application. Moreover, at the stage of summoning only prima facie case has to be seen without adverting or going though the defence of the accused persons. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case is refused and declined.
After hearing learned counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A. this revision is finally disposed of with a direction that if the revisionists appears and surrenders before the Courts below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, then his bail application shall be considered and decided by both the courts below expeditiously in accordance with law after hearing the Public Prosecutor in the aforesaid crime number for the aforesaid offence. During this thirty days no coercive measure shall be taken against the revisionists.
It is made clear that no further time would be granted for the said purpose in any circumstances.
Order Date :- 31.10.2018 Nisha