Court No. - 51
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9791 of 2018 Applicant :- Shashank Dixit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mithilesh Kumar Shukla,Avanish Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
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 impugned chargesheet and cognizance order dated 24.2.2018 passed in case no. 1893 of 2018 arising out of case crime no. 1048 of 2017, U/s 147, 323, 307 IPC and section 7 CLA Act and 3 (2)(5) SC/ST Act, P.S. Naubasta, District Kanpur Nagar pending in the concerned court below.
The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicants 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 submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions 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.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments made in the present application, no case for any interference has been made out. Accordingly, the prayer, as made above, is refused.
However, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the courts below within 45 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided 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 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 45 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 U/s 482 is disposed off finally.
Order Date :- 30.3.2018 Kuldeep