Allahabad High Court
Pankaj And 18 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 August, 2016
Bench: Abhai Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22195 of 2016
Applicant :- Pankaj And 18 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Daga
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Abhai Kumar, J.
This application under Section 482 has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 23.11.2015, as well as entire proceedings registered in its pursuance as Criminal Case No. 189 of 2016, 'State of U.P. Vs. Pankaj and others', under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 504, 427, 336 I.P.C, Police Station ? Tappal, District ? Aligarh (arising out of Case Crime No. 258 of 2015), pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VIth, Aligarh, and further prayed to stay further proceedings of the above referred case.
Sri Rajiv Kumar Pandey, Advocate, has filed his Vakalatnama today on behalf of informant, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that first information report was lodged against 26 persons, during investigation complicity of seven persons was not found correct and their name has been expunged. He has further submitted that there is political rivalry between the parties. The injured was made acting Pradhan, after the death of regular Pradhan. After getting the complaints, the injured was removed from the post of Pradhan by the recommendations of District Magistrate, Aligarh, and Smt. Rekha was appointed as Pradhan by the competent authority. It is submitted that Smt. Rekha is family member of accused persons and due to that political rival this false case has been instituted. It is further submitted that independent witnesses namely Manveer Singh and Raj Kumar have not supported the version of the prosecution and it has been stated that out of enmity Praveen Kumar while making fire upon the accused persons got injured himself and instituted false case.
This fact is admitted that Praveen Kumar got injured in the incident, various witnesses have also supported the case of prosecution including the injured, farther of the injured, mother of the injured and wife of the injured in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
From the facts narrated in the application it can be inferred that a cognizable offence is made out and in the circumstances all the facts that are being disputed are subject to trial before the trial court and disputed points regarding facts cannot be entered into before this Court. 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.IR. 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 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.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments made in the present application, the prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforementioned case is refused.
Accordingly, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 04.08.2016.
Vinod.
