Allahabad High Court
Qamruzaman vs State Of U.P. And Anr on 5 March, 2019
Bench: Bachchoo Lal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4997 of 2019
Applicant :- Qamruzaman
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Chandra Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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 entire proceeding of Case No. 6055 of 2018 pending in the court of A.C.J.M. III, Gautam Budh Nagar as well as cognizance dated 26.11.2018 taken on the charge sheet dated 5.5.2018 filed under section 429 IPC and Section 3/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 3/11 Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 in Case Crime No. 58 of 2018, P.S. Jarcha, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the informant Ved Nagar is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence. In fact, Sudhir has lodged an NCR under section 323, 504, 506 IPC against the applicant and 3 others on 1.3.2018 and the same was converted under section 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC. On the saying of Sudhir and Sushil the informant Ved Nagar has lodged this false and frivolous FIR against the applicant. Arun and Vinod have only heard the sound of fire. Thereafter, they reached on the spot. Arun and Vinod are also not the eye witnesses of the alleged occurrence. The statements of Arun and Sudhir are not believable. In fact, the present prosecution has been instituted only for the purpose of harassment.
On the other hand; learned A.G.A. argued that in FIR it has been mentioned that applicant and other co-accused fired upon the cow and bull and in this incident one bull has sustained gun shot injury. Sushil and Sudhir are said to be eye witnesses of the alleged occurrence. In the statements of witness Sudhir it has come that the applicant and other co-accused have fired upon the cow and bull due to which one bull has sustained gun shot injury. The I.O. after collecting evidence has submitted charge-sheet against the applicant. At this stage it can not be said that on the saying of Sudhir and Sushil the informant Ved Nagar has lodged false FIR against the applicant. There is prima facie evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged offence, therefore, there is no ground to quash the proceedings of the aforementioned case.
A perusal of the record shows that in FIR it has been mentioned that applicant and other co-accused fired upon the cow and bull due to which one bull has sustained gun shot injury. This incident is said to be seen by Sushil and Sudhir. In the statements of Arun and Vinod it has come that they have also heard the sound of firing. The I.O. after collecting evidence has submitted charge-sheet against the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the entire proceeding, cognizable order dated 26.11.2018 as well as charge-sheet dated 5.5.2018 of the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
However, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall 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 applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 5.3.2019
Masarrat
