Court No. - 17
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5708 of 2018
Applicant :- Shiv Pratap
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Mani Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet No. 134 of 2017 dated 10.09.2017 in Case No. 38 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 102 of 2017, under Section 3/7 E.C. Act, 1955 Police Station Ghughali, District Maharajganj, pending before C.J.M., District Maharajganj.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the accused applicant has been falsely implicated in this case; a large number of card holders have given affidavit in respect of accused applicant that no such irregularity was committed by him as alleged in the F.I.R. nor any Essential Commodity was found deficient; he had made a representation before D.M. stating therein that there was no discrepancy in the record of Essential Commodity whereon an enquiry was conducted by 'Tehsildar' in which he did not find any Essential Commodity deficient.
As per the F.I.R., during surprise inspection made of the shop of P.D.S. given to accused applicant, 2.24 quintals of wheat and 23.3 quintals of rise were found deficient. Various irregularities were also found in maintaining of the said record in register. Pursuant to the F.I.R., investigation was made and police found the said allegation correct and has, accordingly, filed charge- sheet under Section 3/7 of the E.C. Act. The entire evidence has not been placed on record by the learned counsel for the applicant which was collected by police during investigation.
At this stage, it is not proper to express any opinion with regard to facts on which the evidence has been gathered by police nor it is under the domain of this Court.
The prayer for quashing the charge-sheet is, accordingly, refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his 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 applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 23.2.2018
A. Mandhani