Allahabad High Court
Mohammad Farhan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 27 January, 2021
Bench: Anil Kumar-Ix
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 78
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17295 of 2020
Applicant :- Mohammad Farhan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Fatma Khatoon
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicant Mohammad Farhan (Minor) through his father Nasimuddin with prayer to quash the entire proceeding in connection with the F.I.R. dated 23.06.2020 in Case Crime No. 245/2020 under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986 (here-in-after referred to as 'Gangster Act'), Police Station- Kareli, District- Prayagraj.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.
In brief, the facts of the case as emerged from the record are that first information report has been lodged by Anil Kumar Singh Station House Officer of police station- Kareili, Prayagraj against 10 named accused persons including the applicant on 23.06.2020 at 18:40 hrs. under Section 2/3 Gangster Act, it is alleged in the F.I.R. that applicant and other co-accused persons have constituted a gang which is indulged in committing offences such as murder, cow slaughter and other offences for the purpose of making temporal and pecuniary gains. In the F.I.R., several cased are cited against gang members such as Case Crime Nos. 127/2020, 585/2017, 366/2016, 476/2018, 167/2020, 168/2020 and 176/2020.
Learned counsel for applicant contended that the applicant is a minor aged about 17 years and is continuing his study. The allegations made in the F.I.R. are absolutely false and fabricated. The applicant is not involved in any such gang. As per gang chart there is only one case against the applicant in which he is on bail i.e. Case Crime No. 127/2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 1932. Prior to this the applicant had filed Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 7861/2020 before this Court with prayer to quash the F.I.R. of this case which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 01.09.2020 without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to apply for bail or anticipatory bail as may be advised.
It is well settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgment that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sparingly, only in such an appropriate case where uncontroverted allegations made in F.I.R. or charge sheet and the evidence relied in support of same do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused. The legal position with regard to exercise jurisdiction by the High Court for quashing the criminal proceeding and the F.I.R. is now well settled. The Apex Court in Kalyani Vs. Janak C.Mehta 2009 AIR SCW 1836 held as under:-
"(1) The High Court ordinarily would not exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash a criminal proceeding and, in particular, a first information report unless the allegations contained therein, even if given face value and taken to be correct in their entirely, disclosed no cognizable offence.
(2) For the said purpose the Court, save and except in very exceptional circumstances, would not look into any document relied upon by the defence.
(3) Such a power should be exercised very sparingly. If the allegations made in the F.I.R. disclose commission of an offence, the Court shall not go beyond the same and pass an order in favour of the accused to hold absence of any mens rea or actus reus.
(4) If the allegation discloses a civil dispute, the same by itself may not be a ground to hold that the criminal proceedings should not be allowed to continue."
In the F.I.R. it is clearly stated that there is well organized gang of the applicant and co-accused persons which is indulged in offence such as murder, cow slaughter and other offences for the purpose of making temporal and pecuniary against. In gang chart of the applicant and other co-accused persons several cases have been mentioned against them. Learned counsel for applicant contended that so far as the applicant is concerned there is just a solitary case against him in which he has been granted bail and on the basis of solitary case he could not be considered a gangster but it is not requirement of law that all gang members operate collectively. A gang may operate through its member acting individually.
From a perusal of the material available on record and keeping in view of the fact of the case that this stage cannot be said that offence levelled against the applicant is not made out.
All the submission 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.There is no sufficient ground to quash the entire proceeding in pursuance of the F.I.R. in the aforesaid case.
On the basis of above discussion prayer to quash the entire proceeding in connection with above mentioned F.I.R. dated 23.06.2020 is hereby refused.
Accordingly, the instant application is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 27.1.2021
Sharad/-
