Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1299 of 2019 (State vs. Shamim and others), arising out of Charge-sheet No. 142 of 2018 dated 07.10.2018 in Case Crime No. 0105 of 2018, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Charra, District Aligarh including the impugned cognizance order dated 05.10.2019, passed in said case, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.7, Aligarh.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the son of respondent no.2 has enticed away the minor daughter of applicant no.1 and applicants have merely gone at his house to enquire about the daughter of applicant no.1, but the respondent no.2 has lodged a first information report of this case making false and baseless allegations, whereas no such incident has taken place. It has been further submitted that applicant no.1 has lodged a first information report under Sections 363, 366 IPC against the son of respondent no.2 and in that matter charge-sheet has already been filed. The first information report of this case was lodged to exert undue pressure upon the applicants and that the charge-sheet has been submitted by the police in routine manner without proper investigation. It has been further submitted that impugned summoning order dated 05.10.2019, has been passed in a mechanical manner on a printed proforma and thus, the said impugned order was passed without application of judicial mind and thus, the impugned summoning order is not sustainable.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and argued that in view of allegations made in the first information report and material collected during investigation, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants.
The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and material on record even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. In well celebrated judgment reported in AIR 1992 SC 605 State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal, Supreme Court has carved out certain guidelines, wherein FIR or proceedings may be quashed but cautioned that the power to quash FIR or proceedings should be exercised sparingly and that too in the rarest of rare cases.
In the instant matter, the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court and even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the material on record it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceeding are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.
After considering arguments raised by the learned counsel for parties and perusing the impugned complaint and the materials in support of the same, this Court does not find it to be a case which can be determined or gone into in an application under Section 482 CrPC. This Court cannot hold a parallel trial in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No such ground appears to be available to the applicants, on the basis of which the impugned charge-sheet/complaint can be quashed going by the settled law in 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 Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.
In view of the above, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants and hence, the prayer for quashing of charge-sheet and proceedings is hereby, refused.
However, so far as the impugned cognizance order dated 05.10.2019 is concerned, perusal of record shows that it has been passed on photocopy of a printed proforma and merely details of case like Name of Accused, Sections, Police Station, Crime Number and Next Date of Listing were filled in the said proforma. It is well settled that cognizance order has to be passed after considering relevant material and showing appropriate reasons. Thus, it appears that this order has been passed in a mechanical way without applying the judicial mind.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the present case and also in view of the law laid down in the case of Ankit Vs. State of U.P. J.I.C. 2010 (1) 432, Basasudin and others Vs. State of U.P. 2011 (1) JIC, 335 All, Abdul Rashid and others Vs. State of U.P. 2010 (3) JIC, 7661 All, the impugned summoning order is not sustainable and the same is liable to be set aside.
Accordingly, the impugned order dated 05.10.2019, passed by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.7, Aligarh, is hereby set aside and matter is remitted back to the Court below to pass the order on cognizance and summoning afresh expeditiously in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 18.2.2021 A. Tripathi