Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Swadesh And Others vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|18 December, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46488 of 2019
Applicant :- Swadesh And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Radhey Shyam Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Radhey Shyam Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri G. P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the cognizance order dated 13.08.2019 and Charge Sheet No. 286 of 2018 dated 12.08.2018 as well as entire proceeding of Case No. 2194 of 2019 (State Vs. Swadesh and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 316 of 2018, under Sections 323, 324, 427, 452, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Jahanganj, District Farrukhabad, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate Sadar, Farrukhabad, with a further prayer to stay further proceeding in the aforesaid case.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the F.I.R. has been lodged with delay of four days. The occurrence is stated to have taken place on 26.06.2018 and on the same day the medical examination was also conducted. Because of the village party rivalry the accused applicants have been implicated. It is further argued that the cross F.I.R. has been lodged by the applicant no. 4 against the four sons of the opposite party no. 2 showing the same date of occurrence on which the present occurrence has taken place. It is admitted to the applicant that the said occurrence took place between two sides.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer of quashing and argued that as per the contents of the F.I.R. cognizable offence is made out.
I have gone through the F.I.R. and find that the applicants are stated to have caused mar-pit with lathi, danda and ganasa, etc. and have caused injuries to the complainant's side, the injury memos have been annexed at pages 25, 26 & 27 of the paper book, hence, it cannot be denied that cognizable offence is made out. The police after investigation and after having recorded the statements of as many as ten witnesses has submitted the charge sheet against the accused applicant. The truthfulness of the statements of these witnesses cannot be adjudged in proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the same would require trial.
The arguments which are made by the learned counsel for the applicant are related to factual aspect which cannot be seen at this stage in the proceeding under Section 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.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail may be considered and decided in view of the settled 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. For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 VPS
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Swadesh And Others vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
18 December, 2019
Judges
  • Dinesh Kumar Singh I
Advocates
  • Radhey Shyam Yadav