Prabhakar Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another
2011 Latest Caselaw 5374 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 54
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32638 of 2011
 

 
Petitioner :- Prabhakar Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Pramod Kumar Sharma
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt.Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Rajesh Dayal Khare,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the  proceeding of  Criminal Case No. 1121 of 2011, (State Vs. Pankaj Darji and others) in case Crime No. 225 of 2010,  under Sections 147, 323, 355, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Shankergarh, District Allahababad arising out of charge sheet No. 21 of 2011 dated 26.04.2011 pending in the Court of Learned Additional Cheif Judicial Magistrate, 10, Allahabad.

Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant was not named in the F.I.R. nor in the statement of informant/ opposite party no. 2 which has been recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

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 applicant. All the submission 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 Supreme Court in 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228, or 245 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.

The prayer for quashing the criminal proceeding is refused.

However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement 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 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 applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed off.

Order Date :- 21.10.2011

vks