Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3953 of 2019 Appellant :- Shivam @ Shivam Chauhan And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Bal Krishna Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed challenging the cognizance order dated 26.2.2019 and charge sheet dated 5.9.2018 as well as entire proceedings of Special Case No. 16 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime no. 61 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(Va) SC/ST Act, P.S. Lavedi, district-Etawah, pending in the Court of Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Etawah.
Learned counsel for the appellants contended that no offence is made out against the appellants and they have been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior intention of harassing them.
Per contra, learned A.G.A., contended that there is no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the learned trial court.
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 applicants. 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. Moreover, the applicant has got right of discharge under Sections 239, 245 or 227 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
The prayer for quashing the cognizance order dated 26.2.2019 as well as chargesheet is refused.
However, it is directed that in case the appellants appear and surrender before the court below within four weeks from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in the light of the 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. in accordance with law after hearing the public prosecutor.
For a period of four weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the appellants. However, in case, the appellants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this appeal stands dispose of.
Order Date :- 30.5.2019 Faridul