Court No. - 53
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2192 of 2019 Applicant :- Vijendra Singh And 2 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Code') has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 12.03.2018, the cognizance order dated 29.10.2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 7183/IX of 2018 (State v. Vijendra Singh and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 60 of 2018, under Sections 147, 452, 323, 506, 504, 325 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station - Kotwali, District - Mathura, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-III, Mathura.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants were not arrested by the police during investigation. From the material brought on the record, no offence is disclosed against the applicants. The present prosecution launched against the applicants is wholly mala fide as such, the present proceedings are sheer abuse of the process of the court.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer so made and contention thereof raised by learned counsel for the applicants and submitted that material on record is sufficient for justifying filing of charge sheet, initiation of proceedings and passing of the impugned cognizance order in the aforesaid case against the applicants by the court below.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case, it cannot be said at this stage 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 in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code.
Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the impugned charge sheet, the impugned cognizance order as well as the entire proceedings in the aforesaid case is refused.
However, none of the aforesaid offences alleged against applicants is punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years. The police has submitted charge-sheet. All the materials relevant for disposal of bail application is available on record before trial court/court concerned.
In view of order passed by this Court in the case of Smt. Sakeena and another v. State of U.P. and another reported in 2018 (2) ACR 2190, it is directed that in case the applicants file their bail application, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided on the same day by the courts below. If for any reason it is not possible to decide the regular bail application on the same day, then prayer for interim bail shall be considered and decided on the same day by the courts below.
For a period of 60 days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019 I. Batabyal