Court No. - 40
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22469 of 2019 Applicant :- Sunil @ Anoop Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the chargesheet dated 26.7.2018 (State of U.P. vs. Chhannu Kumar Gupta and others) arising out of Case Crime No.50 of 2018 under Section 143, 153, 186, 341, 353, 506 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Shakti Nagar, District Sonbhadra pending before Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Duddhi, district Sonbhadra as well as the cognizance order dated 10.4.2019.
As per the allegations made in the FIR it is alleged that on 25.7.2018 on account of an accident the applicants had blocked the State Highway and were raising slogans. On getting information the police reached at the place of incident and tried to control the crowd but the accused persons continued to instigate the people and road blockage continued for eight hours. On the basis of the said allegations, FIR was lodged against the applicants and police thoroughly investigated the matter and submitted the chargesheet against the applicant on which cognizance has been taken on 10.4.2019.
From the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and material collected during the course of investigation, 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, disputed question of fact cannot be considered, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283, the prayer for quashing the chargesheet is refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within thirty days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).
For a period of thirty days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 7.6.2019 Deepika