Court No. - 83
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6501 of 2021 Applicant :- Umesh Kumar Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Om Narayan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Om Narayan Mishra, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.
Perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging charge-sheet No.772 of 2019 dated 07.12.2019 submitted in Case Crime No.0904 of 2019, under Sections- 420, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Civil Lines, District- Moradabad, as well as entire proceedings of consequential Criminal Case No.9815 of 2020, (State Vs. Umesh Kumar Sharma), under Sections- 420, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Civil Lines, District- Moradabad, now pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moradabad.
Record shows that an F.I.R. dated 14.09.2019 was lodged by first informant/opposite party-2, Sheesh Pal Singh, which was registered as Case Crime No.0904 of 2019, under Sections- 420, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Civil Lines, District- Moradabad. In the aforesaid F.I.R., two persons, namely, Anil Sharma and Umesh Kumar Sharma have been nominated as named accused.
As per prosecution story as unfolded in F.I.R., it is alleged that accused persons have taken money from first informant/opposite party-2, Sheesh Pal Singh on the false promise of securing employment in P.A.C. However, no appointment was secured.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in above-mentioned case crime number. No offence under Sections 406 and 420 I.P.C. is made out against applicant. He further contends that there is no material on record to support prosecution of application in above-mentioned case crime number. As such entire proceedings of above-mentioned are liable to be quashed by this Court.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed this application. Learned A.G.A. contends that subsequent to F.I.R. dated 14.09.2019, Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of Case Crime No.0904 of 2019, under Sections- 420, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Civil Lines, District- Moradabad, in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. During the course of investigation, Investigating Officer examined various witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and further collected material, which is adverse to applicant. Learned A.G.A. has then submitted that intention to commit fraud was in existence from inception. As such, offence under Section- 420 I.P.C. is clearly made out against applicant. Learned A.G.A. further contends that two witnesses, namely, Anil Sharma and Tarun Sharma, who were examined under Section 161 Cr.P.C., have specifically implicated applicant in the crime in question. On the basis of above, charge-sheet dated 07.12.2019 has been submitted against applicant. Perusal of charge-sheet goes to show that as many as four prosecution witnesses have been nominated in above-mentioned charge-sheet. On the aforesaid premise, it is thus urged that at this stage, it cannot be said that prosecution of applicant is false or there is no material to support the prosecution. Learned A.G.A. lastly contends that this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot decide credibility and reliability of witnesses who have been examined under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of 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 applicants. All the submissions made at the Bar relate to the disputed defence of applicants, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.PC. This Court cannot appraise or appreciate evidence for recording a finding one way or the other. At this stage, only prime facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Supreme Court in R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866 and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.
In view of above, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.
It is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.7.2021 Saif