Allahabad High Court
Lavkush And 3 Ors. vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 October, 2014
Bench: Naheed Ara Moonis
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 47
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42121 of 2014
Applicant :- Lavkush And 3 Ors.
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Prasad Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, leared AGA for the State and perused the record.
The instant application has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of case no. 633/IX/2014 (State Vs. Lavkush and others), in Case Crime No. 110/2014, Under section 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, police station Badausa, district Banda pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Atarra, district Banda.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the opposite party no. 2 falsely implicated the applicants with the vague allegations that the applicants have assaulted Smt. Gomti Devi, wife of first informant and one Sheela Devi by using abusive language and also threatened of dire consequences. It has been further stated that the applicants and first informant are relatives and there is some dispute between them regrading demarcation of land which is being used as common way by the villagers. Due to this, opposite party no. 2 by way lodging an FIR tried to make pressure upon the applicants and the FIR was lodged after a delay of 11 days though they were trying to compromise the matter. According to the medical report, both the aforesaid victims have sustained simple injuries which does not corroborate the prosecution case. Hence the entire prosecution against the applicants is nothing but an abuse of the process of law.
The learned AGA has opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicants and has submitted that the court below has rightly taken cognizance against the applicants. There is no illegality or perversity int he order passed by the Court below. The innocence of the applicants cannot be adjudged at the pre-trial state.
Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel at the bar and after going through the record of the case, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. The court below has rightly taken cognizance against the applicant.
At the state of issuing process of the court below is not expected to examine and assess in detail the material placed on record. Only this has to be seen whether prima facie cognizable offence is made out or not. The Apex Court has also laid down the guidelines in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal, 1999 SCC (Crl) 426, and State of Bihar Vs. PP Sharma, 1992 SCC (Crl) 192 where the criminal proceedings could be interfered and quashed in exercise of its power envisaged under section 482 Cr.P.C
From the perusal of the materials on record and looking into the facts and after considering the arguments of the learned AGA for the State, it cannot be said that no offence has been made out against the applicants. Cognizance taken by the trial court, whereby the applicants have been summoned to face the trial suffers from no illegality and as such the prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused. There is no merit in the petition. The petition is accordingly dismissed.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30-days from today and apply for bail, then their prayer for bail shall be heard and disposed of in view of decision rendered in the case of Smt. Amrawati and another Vs. State of UP reported in 2005 Cr.LJ, 755 which was approved by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlenfdra Pratap Singh BVs. State of UP (2009) 4 SCC 437.
In case the applicants do not appear before the court below within stipulated time the court below shall be at liberty to take appropriate action against the applicants in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 13.10.2014
SKS
