Allahabad High Court
Anoop And Another vs State Of Up And Another on 9 July, 2019
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26461 of 2019
Applicant :- Anoop And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Diwakar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 15.11.2016 as well as order dated 21.08.2018 in Complaint Case No. 382 of 2015, under Sections 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Husainganj, District Fatehpur.
As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that on 05.02.2018, the applicants illegally tried to demolish the wall of the first informant and on objection being, she was assaulted and threatened for life. Again on 06.02.2015 at about 9:00 AM, the applicants armed with licencee gun and tamancha reached at the place of the incident and assaulted and disrobed her and abused her with the name of her caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate her.
Learned Magistrate after recording the statements of the witnesses under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC, summoned the applicants to face trial under Sections 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(10) of SC/ST Act vide order dated 15.11.2016.
Being aggrieved with the said order, the applicants preferred a revision before the Revisional Court. The Revisional Court after taking into consideration the entire material on record passed a well reasoned and detailed order dismissing the revision vide order dated 21.02.2018.
Against the said order, present application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, no offence is disclosed against the applicants and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the statements of the witnesses, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, summoning order cannot be quashed.
Moreover, all the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 CrPC. At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the impugned orders is therefore refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as expeditiously as possible after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.
With the aforesaid observations, this application under Section 482 CrPC is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 9.7.2019
Nadim
