Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 63 of 2018 Applicant :- Virendra Pal And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Dhar Dwivedi,Rajendra Babu Gaur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amit Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Ved Prakash Vaish,J.
Heard Sri Suresh Dhar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri R.B. Gaur, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. M.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the opposite party no.1.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that vide earlier order dated 8.1.2018, the matter was referred to Mediation Centre. The report of Mediation Centre dated 6.4.2018 is already on record, shows that the mediation has failed.
The present application has been filed for quashing entire proceeding including charge-sheet dated 9.9.2017 in Criminal Case No.786 of 2017 (State Vs. Virendra Pal and others) arising out of Case Crime No.1464 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur.
The contention of the learned Counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the criminal case has been instituted with malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contentions.
Prayer for quashing the entire proceeding has been opposed by the learned A.G.A. for the State by submitting that there are specific allegations against the applicants and there is no ground for quashing the entire proceeding.
From the perusal of the 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 submission made at the bar relates 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 the Supreme Court in cases 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.
In view of the aforesaid, the prayer for quashing the entire proceeding including charge-sheet dated 9.9.2017 of aforesaid criminal case, is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within a period of 30 days from today and apply for bail, then their prayer for bail may be considered in view of the settled law. 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 applicants. However, in case the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is disposed off.
(V.P. Vaish, J.) Order Date :- 28.11.2018/Savita