Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14161 of 2018 Applicant :- Sonpal Singh And 6 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Puneet Kumar Singh,Dharmendra Prasad Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 09.07.2015, cognizance order dated 23.02.2017 and B.W. order dated 30.01.2018 and 17.02.2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 4614 of 2017 (State Vs. Sonpal and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 204 of 2015, under Sections- 147, 379, 504, 506, 323 I.P.C. and 3(1) (X) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Gariha Rangeen, District- Shahjahanpur, pending in the court of Civil Judge (S.D.)/F.T.C., Shahjahanpur.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the FIR version is not supported by the statement recorded during the course of the investigation. Also, it is submitted that the FIR itself was lodged after ten days and that no recoveries have been made from the applicants. Also, the allegations of offence committed under Section 323 are not made out against the applicants.
It is thus submitted that the entire prosecution is bundle of lies which is not made out from the documents and evidence gathered during the investigation. Certain crucial aspects of the matter pertaining to the issue whether offence is made out against the applicant clearly raise questions of fact which require appraisal of evidence. Therefore, no interference is warranted at this stage, in the present proceedings.
In the absence of any of the grounds recognized by the Supreme Court which might justify the quashing of complaint or the impugned proceedings, the prayer for quashing the same is refused as I do not see any abuse of the courts process either. The summoning court has been vested with sufficient powers to discharge the accused even before the stage to frame the charges comes, if for reasons to be recorded it considers the charge to be groundless.
However, as requested, the applicants are permitted to appear before the concerned court within a month from today through their counsel and move an application claiming discharge. The concerned court shall after hearing the counsel decide the application on merits, in accordance with law, within a period which shall not exceed a period of three months from today.
No coercive measures shall be adopted against the applicants for a period of three months from today or till the disposal of the discharge application, whichever is earlier.
If the concerned court after hearing the counsel for the accused feels persuaded to have the view that the accused ought not to have been summoned and the charge is groundless it shall not abstain from discharging the accused only on the ground that the material available at the time of summoning was the same which is available on record at the time of hearing the discharge application. On the other hand, if the lower court even after hearing the counsel for accused holds the view that the accused has been rightly summoned and the material brought on record does not indicate the charges to be groundless it shall make an order to that effect and proceed further in the matter, in accordance with law and shall also be free to adopt such measures to procure the attendance of the accused as the law permits.
With the above observations, this application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 24.4.2018 A. Singh