Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28354 of 2019 Applicant :- Satya Narain Gaur Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- J.P. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amit Tripathi
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to correct the complaint case number in the application.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 796 of 2019 (Shubham Gaur Vs. Satya Narain), under Sections 420, 467, 468 I.P.C., Police Station Feelkhana, District Kanpur Nagar pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Room No. 3 Kanpur Nagar and impugned summoning order dated 06.06.2019.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that prima facie no case is made out against the applicant. It has been submitted that question whether the alleged will deed is forged or genuine could be examined by the Civil Court only. It was further pointed out that after investigtation police have submitted final report.
Learned A.G.A. and Sri Amit Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 have opposed the application and argued that material on record disclosed cognizance offence against the applicant. It has been submitted that matter was not investigated properly by the police and after submission of final report, applicant was summoned, after proceedings under sections 200 and 202 Cr. P.C.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the fact of the case at this stage, it cannot be said that prima facie no case is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in jurisdiction of Section 482 Cr. P.C. It is well settled that at this stage only prime case is to be seen. Considering the law laid down by Apex Court in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, material on record and considering the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, no case for quashing of the proceeding is made out.
The prayer for quashing as made above is hereby refused.
However, it is directed that in case applicant appears and surrenders before the courts below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously on its own merits 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 and judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court 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 applicant surrenders and applies for bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Courts below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid direction, the application is disposed off finally.
Order Date :- 25.7.2019 T.S.