Allahabad High Court
Ajeet Kumar Nishad vs State Of U.P.And Another on 8 July, 2019
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 65
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25103 of 2019
Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Nishad
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Prashant Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri A. D. Misra, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of impugned charge sheet dated 04.12.2018 as well as entire proceeding of Case No. 390 of 2019 (State vs. Suraj Prasad Nishad) arising out of Case Crime No. 236 of 2018, under Sections 147, 323, 354, 506, 434 I.P.C., Police Station, Ram Nagar, District Varanasi pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- IX, Varanasi.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated. No such occurrence has ever taken place. It is further stated that the present case is nothing but a malicious prosecution and an abuse of process of law. He further stated that if proceedings are allowed to continue, that would amount to an abuse of process of court.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing.
Perused the FIR. According to FIR accused-applicants are family members of opposite party no. 2 and had uprooted the landmark established by the authority and had done mar-peet. After investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted. The evidence gathered by the Investigating Officer cannot be disbelieved in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C..
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail may 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 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 finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 8.7.2019
V.S.Singh
