Allahabad High Court
Tasleem @ Danna And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 16 August, 2022
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22879 of 2022
Applicant :- Tasleem @ Danna And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Darwari Lal
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Darwari Lal, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 19.09.2021 and cognizance/summoning order dated 22.11.2021 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.4940 of 2021 (State Vs. Tasleem @ Danna and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 221 of 2021, under Sections 341, 323, 504, 324, 325, 308/34 I.P.C., Police Station-Fatehganj West, District-Bareilly, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-5th, Bareilly.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that for the incident dated 19.07.2021, an FIR was lodged on 19.07.2021 at about 19:19 hrs by applicant no.1, Tasleem Khan against Pradhan Hasmuddin, Ikrar Mohammad, Nishar Mohammad, Ahshan Khan and Islam Khan with the allegations that the aforesaid persons came with lathi, danda and sharp edge weapons and after using abusive language, assaulted the informant as well as his family members in which two persons sustained injuries. For the same incident, another FIR was lodged on 19.07.2021 at about 23:09 hrs by Shakruddin against the applicants with the allegations that due to enmity because of elections, the applicants stopped them at crossing and after using abusing language, have assaulted them in which informant as well as others have sustained injuries. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the present FIR has been lodged as a counterblast to the FIR lodged by the applicant no.1 against the accused persons as detailed in the preceding lines. He further submits that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He further submits that the applicants have sustained injuries in the alleged incident, therefore, the present FIR has been lodged as a counterblast in order to pressurize the applicants to withdraw the earlier case lodged against the accused therein not to proceed with the case. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. He, therefore, submits that the charge-sheet, summoning order as well as entire proceedings be quashed by this Court as the same is an abuse process of Court.
Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State have opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants by submitting that the present FIR has been lodged by Shakruddin, who is not named accused in the FIR lodged by the applicant no.1. The applicants have not been able to show any relation of informant with the named accused in the FIR lodged by Shakruddin. He further submits that all the contentions raised by the applicants' counsel relate to disputed questions of fact. On the basis of material on record after conducting of statutory investigation under Chapter XII Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer, a strong prima facie case is made out against the applicant for the commission of the alleged incident. In support of his case, learned AGA has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Dilbag Rai Vs. State of Haryana & Others reported in AIR 2019 (SC) 693 and Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Arvind Khanna reported in MANU/SC/1432/2019.
I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present application.
This Court finds that the submissions made by the applicants' learned counsel call for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may adequately be adjudicated upon only by the trial court and while doing so even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court in this case. The issue whether it is appropriate for this Court being the Highest Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the charge-sheet and the proceedings at the stage when the Magistrate has merely issued process against the applicants and trial is to yet to come only on the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicants that present criminal case initiated by opposite party no.2 are not only malicious but also abuse of process of law has elaborately been discussed by the Apex Court in the following judgments:-
(i) R.P. Kapur Versus State of Punjab; AIR 1960 SC 866,
(ii) State of Haryana & Ors. Versus Ch. Bhajan Lal & Ors.;1992 Supp.(1) SCC 335,
(iii) State of Bihar & Anr. Versus P.P. Sharma & Anr.; 1992 Supp (1) SCC 222,
(iv) Zandu Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd. & Ors. Versus Mohammad Shariful Haque & Anr.; 2005 (1) SCC 122,
(v) M. N. Ojha Vs. Alok Kumar Srivastava; 2009 (9) SCC 682,
(vi) Mohd. Allauddin Khan Vs. The State of Bihar & Others; 2019 0 Supreme (SC) 454,
(vii) Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.; 2020 0 Supreme (SC) 45, and laslty
(ix) Rajeev Kaurav Vs. Balasahab & Others; 2020 0 Supreme (SC) 143.
In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not deem it proper, and therefore cannot be persuaded to have a pre-trial before the actual trial begins. A threadbare discussion of various facts and circumstances, as they emerge from the allegations made against the accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. But it shall suffice to observe that the perusal of the F.I.R. and the material collected by the Investigating Officer on the basis of which the charge sheet has been submitted makes out a prima facie case against the accused at this stage and there appear to be sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. I do not find any justification to quash the charge sheet or the proceedings against the applicants arising out of them as the case does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Apex Court which may justify their quashing.
The prayer for quashing the impugned charge-sheet dated 19.09.2021 and summoning order dated 22.11.2021 as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case are refused, as I do not see any abuse of the court's process at this pre-trial stage.
The present application has no merit and is, accordingly, rejected.
Order Date :- 16.8.2022
Jitendra/-
