Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27694 of 2016 Applicant :- Smt. Shanti Devi @ Son Devi And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mata Pher Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dinesh Kumar,Hasan Abbas,Syed Mehdi Haider Zaidi
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code') has been filed on behalf of the applicants to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 10453 of 2016 (State v. Manoj and others), under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 354 of I.P.C., 1860 and Section 3/4 of D.P.
Act, 1961, arising out of Case Crime No. 7 of 2016, Police Station - Mahila Thana, District - Mathura, pending in the court of J.M.-II, Mathura, as well as to quash the Charge-Sheet No. 35 of 2016 dated 05.03.2016 and the cognizance order dated 24.05.2016.
Learned counsel for the applicants contended that the present F.I.R. has been filed against the applicants maliciously, with false allegation, only to harass them. He further contended that no specific role has been assigned to any of the applicant.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer so made and argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicants.
From the perusal of 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 applicants.
All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code.
In view of above, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings, the impugned charge-sheet as well as the impugned cognizance order in the aforesaid case is refused.
Apart from arguing on the merits of the case, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the case may be send to mediation centre so that it may be amicably settled between the parties through mediation.
There is specific provision in the Code in this regard. As per provision of Section 265B of the Code, an accused may file application for plea bargaining in the Court in which such offence is pending for trial.
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and another Vs. Union of India reported in 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1501 held that the directions to settle a case after it is registered, is not a correct expression of law.
Accordingly, this Court cannot send the matter to the mediation centre for mediation/settlement.
However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that if the applicants apply for bail, the same shall be disposed of on the same day on which they are taken into custody, as per the guidelines prescribed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Social Action Forum's case (supra).
It is further directed that if applicant nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 - Smt. Shanti Devi alias Son Devi, Smt. Tarawati alias Mona Pal, Bantoo alias Virendra Singh and Laxmi Narayan Baghel file discharge application under Section 239 of the Code through counsel within 30 days from today, the same shall be decided by a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law.
Till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5.
For a period of 60 days from today or till applicant no. 3 - Manoj Kumar surrenders and applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 8.4.2019 I. Batabyal