Allahabad High Court
Abhishek Singh vs State Of U.P. And Anr on 12 March, 2019
Bench: Bachchoo Lal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8988 of 2019
Applicant :- Abhishek Singh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr
Counsel for Applicant :- A.K. Mishra,Sati Shanker Tripathi
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 charge-sheet no. 553A of 2017 dated 12.5.2018 and cognizance order dated 5.6.2018 passed by C.J.M., Aligarh as well as entire proceeding Criminal Case No. 3691 of 2018 (State Vs. Pushpa and others) under section 323, 506 IPC, P.S. Quarsi, District Aligarh arising out of Case Crime No. 573 of 2017 pending in the court of C.J.M., Aligarh.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that initially the O.P. No. 2 has lodged NCR on 20.4.2017 under section 323, 506 IPC against the applicant, his sister and mother. The I.O. has submitted charge-sheet only against Pushpa, mother of applicant under section 323, 506 IPC. Further investigation was conducted on application moved by the informant. The second statement of informant was also recorded by the I.O. on 12.1.2018 in which he has stated that he has named the applicant and his sister Shivani only to make pressure upon them and ruin their future. It has further been submitted that one FIR was also lodged by father of applicant namely Tejveer Singh on 21.4.2017 against O.P. No. 2 and his father under section 452, 354, 323, 307, 336, 506 IPC showing the incident dated 20.4.2017 at 10.30 a.m. In counter blast this false and frivolous NCR has been lodged by the O.P. No. 2. In fact, no offence is made out against the applicant. The applicant has falsely been implicated only for the purpose of harassment.
On the other hand learned A.G.A. argued that the NCR was lodged by O.P. No. 2 on 20.4.2017 against the applicant and two others. Thereafter on the next day i.e. 21.4.2017 the father of applicant has lodged FIR against O.P. No. 2 and one another. At this stage it can not be said that the O.P. No. 2 has lodged FIR in counter blast to the FIR lodged by father of applicant. The O.P. No. 2 has lodged NCR on the same day without unnecessary delay. In this incident the O.P. No. 2 has sustained injuries and at the time of medical examination 11 injuries have been found on the person of injured Lalit Narain (O.P. No. 2). The I.O. after collecting evidence has submitted charge-sheet against the applicant. At this stage it can not be said that no offence is made out against the applicant.
A perusal of the record shows that the NCR was lodged by O.P. No. 2 on the same day i.e. 20.4.2017 showing the incident to be taken place at 11.00 a.m. Thereafter, the father of applicant has lodged FIR on the next day i.e. 21.4.2017. In such circumstances at this stage it can not be said that the O.P. No. 2 has lodged NCR in counter blast to the FIR lodged by father of applicant. Injury report shows that 11 injuries have been found on the person of injured (O.P. No. 2). The I.O. has submitted charge-sheet against the applicant after collecting evidence. At this stage it can not be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. The disputed defence of the accused can not 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 12.5.2018 and cognizance order dated 5.6.2018 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 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 :- 12.3.2019
Masarrat
