Allahabad High Court
Smt. Ranjana And Another vs State Of U.P And Another on 14 September, 2022
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 85
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17769 of 2022
Applicant :- Smt. Ranjana And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Singh,B.N.Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the chargesheet dated 29.06.2021 and summoning order dated 18.08.2021 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Kalpi, District Jalaun in Case Crime No. 32 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 I.PC., Police Station-Ata, District-Jalaun.
Brief facts of the case are that an FIR was lodged by the opposite party no.2 against the applicants with the allegations that after the death of her husband, the applicants have prepared some forged documents in order to grab the share of opposite party no.2 in the property.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant no.1 is the second wife of late Mahesh Kumar as admitted by opposite party no,.2 in the complaint filed by her in the year 2012 and applicant no.2 is the father of applicant no.1, therefore, no offence under relevant sections is made out against the applicants as they are not grabbing the property of opposite party no.2. Moreover, no evidence has been collected by the investigating officer regarding any forged document being prepared by the applicants. Therefore, the present proceedings pending against the applicants are liable to be quashed.
Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, 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 applicants for commission of the alleged offence. In support of his case, learned A.G.A. 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 lastly
(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 perusal of the F.I.R. and the material collected by the Investigating Officer, on the basis of which 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 them. 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 29.06.2021 and summoning order dated 18.08.2021 is 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, dismissed.
Order Date :- 14.9.2022
Madhurima
