Court No. - 78
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9559 of 2021 Applicant :- Virendra @ Balendu And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Avanish Pratap Singh,Udai Bhan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,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 for quashing the entire proceedings of case no. 510 of 2020 as well as charge-sheet and summoning order dated 03.06.2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 132 of 2020 pending in the court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Saharanpur (State vs. Mahendra and others), under Section 147, 323, 504 IPC and 3(1) (Da), 3(1) Gha 3(2) (va), SC/ST Act, P.S. Nangal, District Saharanpur.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment. Learned counsel for the applicants further stated that he is not pressing his main prayer on merits and prayed that a direction may be issued to the concerned courts below to consider and decide the bail application of the applicants expeditiously in accordance with law.
From the 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 the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be, before the court below and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of case as well as charge-sheet is refused.
….However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 60 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the 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 reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
For a period of 60 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 applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
Order Date :- 21.5.2021 Ujjawal Digitally signed by Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav Date: 2021.05.22 11:38:57 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad