Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4489 of 2019
Revisionist :- Swatantra Kumar Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Ram Sajiwan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This criminal revision has been filed with the prayer to set aside the judgment and order dated 5.10.2019 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur in case no. 2405 of 2009, arising out of case crime no. 2133 of 2009 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Hamirpur and further to stay effect and operation of the said order.
It is submitted by the learned counsel of the revisionists that one FIR has been lodged on false grounds at Kanpur while the revisionists have not committed any offence. It is also submitted that on the basis of same set of facts present F.I.R. was lodged at district Hamirpur. Though transfer application moved by opposite party no.3 was rejected yet revisionists have no concern with the present matter. No specific role has been assigned against them. Discharge application moved at the stage of framing of charge was also rejected vide impugned order on insufficient ground. It is also submitted that revisionists are living separately. There is no sufficient evidence to frame charge against the revisionists. Learned counsel for the revisionists pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer.
I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.
As is evident, 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 a prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in the 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. Court dealing with the matter at the stage of framing of charge is to see only a prima facie case and from a perusal of the material available on record and keeping in view the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the revisionists. Hence, prayer made in the revision is refused. The revision being devoid of merits is liable to be dismissed and the same is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019/safi