Allahabad High Court
Subhash Chandra vs State Of U.P.And Another on 9 July, 2019
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 65
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24486 of 2019
Applicant :- Subhash Chandra
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Perdeep Kumar Vishnoi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Perdeep Kumar Vishnoi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ankit Srivastava, learned Brief Holder appearing for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet no.63 of 2019 dated 12.02.2019 in Case Crime No.784 of 2018 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506, 465 IPC, P.S. Hasanpur, District Amroha and its consequential proceedings of Case No.309/9 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No.784 of 2018) pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/ Judicial Magistrate, Hasanpur, District Amorha and also a prayer is made to stay the proceedings in this case till the disposal of this application.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the impugned house, which the opposite party no. 2 is stating that the accused-applicant no. 1 had agreed to sell for a consideration of Rs.30.00 lacs to him, was in possession of his forefather for last 55 years. The applicant is not the owner of the same. Earlier the father of applicant Pannal Lal had filed O.S. No. 779 of 1999 against one Smt. Sadhna Sharma in which stay was granted in his father's favour. Later on Smt. Sadhna Sharma has sold the house to some one else. No such deal has taken place between the accused-applicant and opposite party no. 2. The Investigating Officer has filed charge-sheet after investigation erroneously, which needs to be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the charge sheet.
I have gone through the FIR. As per FIR, an agreement was entered into between the accused-applicant and opposite party no. 2 for purchase of house an amount of Rs.16.00 lacs was advanced by the opposite party no. 2 in favour of the accused-applicant and the remaining Rs.14.00 lacs was to be paid but in the meantime, the opposite party no. 2 came to know that the accused-applicant was not owner of the said house, therefore, he demanded his money back and the same has not been returned. As per FIR, the agreement was forged one.
After the investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted. The evidence, which has been recorded by the Investigating Officer cannot be looked into in the proceedings under section 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 applicant. 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 and 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 of the aforesaid case 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, then the bail application of the applicant be considered and decided in accordance with law. 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. Within the same period, discharge application may be moved before the trial court which shall be disposed of in accordance with law.
With aforesaid direction, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 9.7.2019
AU
