Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27185 of 2018
Applicant :- Shamsher And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Shukla,Kulveer Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Prashant Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of judgement and order dated 19.04.2018 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No.7, Saharanpur in Criminal Revision No. 370 of 2017 (Shamsher and others Vs. State of U.P.) as well as the entire proceedings of the Complaint Case No. 299 of 2013 (Amir Alam Vs. Shamsher and others) pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur and also quashing of the summoning order dated 19.08.2014 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur in Complaint Case No. 299 of 2013 (Amir Alam Vs. Shamsher and others) by which applicants have summoned for offences punishable under Sections 352, 323 and 506 I.P.C.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the offences under Sections 352, 323 and 506 I.P.C., under which the accused applicants have been summoned, are not constituted on the basis of evidence recorded by the court below. This Complaint has been filed as a counter-blast of the case earlier filed by applicant no.4, Shamshad.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the summoning order and the proceedings.
Perused the impugned order in which it has been clearly stated that accused applicants have looted an amount of Rs. 12,000/- from brother of O.P. No.2 at the point of country made pistol and he was threatened to be killed. The said statement is supported by two other witnesses also. These statements cannot be disbelieved at this stage in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as that would require trial.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants 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 applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 5.9.2018
A. Mandhani