Court No. - 69
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36207 of 2019
Applicant :- Santosh Kumar
Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Yadav,Ashish Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 24.6.2018 being STV No.122 of 2019 (State Vs. Santosh Kumar), under Section 354C, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Meja, District Allahabad, arising out of Case Crime No.228 of 2017 as well as the cognizance taking order dated 3.7.2019.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant 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 applicant. 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the summoning order is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicant 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 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 off.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 Dev/-