Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27251 of 2018
Applicant :- Sudama Sharma
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Prashant Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 944 of 2016 (Sukhni Vs. Sudama Sharma and others), under Sections 376 IPC, Police Station Dudhara, District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the present case is a counter blast to the case been filed by the accused applicant no. 1 against husband opposite party no. 2, under section 436 IPC being Crime No. 70 of 2016, which was lodged in respect of the shop having been burned by the husband of opposite party no. 2. By way of retaliation the present case has been lodged by the opposite party no. 2 against the accused- applicant. If the proceedings are allowed to continue that would amount to abuse of process of law.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing.
perused the record. According to the complaint dated 27.2.2016, the accused-applicant is alleged to have committed rape upon the opposite party no. 2 entering into her house. In this regard, statements of the complaint as well as two wintesees have been recorded by the trial court.
At this stage veracity of those statements cannot be considered in the proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
However, if the applicant moves bail application before the court below within 30 days from today, the same shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally
disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.9.2018
A.P. Pandey