Tilak Ram And 3 Others vs State Of U.P.And Another
2019 Latest Caselaw 2139 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 68
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11245 of 2019
 

 
Applicant :- Tilak Ram And 3 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Kashyap
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 14.4.2018 including cognizance order dated 22.7.2018 as well as entire proceeding of Case No. 3163 of 2018, State Vs. Tilak Ram & others, Case Crime No. 142 of 2018, under section 323, 504, 325 IPC, P.S. Gajraula, District Pilibhit pending in the court of Civil Judge (S.D.), F.T.C./A.C.J.M., Pilibhit.

The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 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.I.R. 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 lastly 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.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the charge-sheet dated 14.4.2018 including cognizance order dated 22.7.2018 as well as entire proceeding of the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.

However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.

Order Date :- 30.3.2019

Masarrat