Court No. - 1
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6841 of 2018
Applicant :- Sudhash Chand Gaur And Another Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Khurshed Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Khurshed Alam, learned counsels for the applicants and Sri I.P.Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet no. 01 of 2017 dated 10.07.2017, in S.S.T. No. 147 of 2017, Case Crime No. 1076 of 2016, under Sections 323, 427, 504, 506, 354(A), 336 I.P.C.
and 7/8 POCSO Act and 3(1)(x)(xi) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Mahuli, District Sant Kabir Nagar.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that applicant no. 1 is son of co-accused Deepak and Pintu is also resident of the same village of Deepak. There appears to be no allegation against the applicants in statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. He further submits that the complainant herself belongs to Scheduled Caste. 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 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 prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case based on the charge-sheet is refused. However, these disputed question of fact will be considered by the court below while considering the bail application of the applicants.
The application lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.3.2018 A.K.Srivastava