Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29264 of 2019 Applicant :- Sanjay Tiwari And 3 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Birendra Singh, Anurag Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the entire further proceedings of Complaint Case No.279 of 2017 (Chunni Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others), under Sections 323, 354(Kha), 427, 452, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(Da) (Dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Bansgaon, District Gorakhpur.
As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that on 07.12.2017 at about 2:00 PM, the applicants abused the victim with the name of his caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate him and had demolished the wall, which was constructed by him and on being asked to refrain from abusing, the applicants assaulted the victim by kicks and fists.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of enquiry, no offence is disclosed against the applicants and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, further proceeding cannot be quashed.
Moreover, all the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CrPC. At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the entire proceedings is therefore refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as expeditiously as possible after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.
With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 Nadim