Allahabad High Court
Dr. Rajesh Pratap Giri vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 4 April, 2023
Bench: Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3167 of 2023
Applicant :- Dr. Rajesh Pratap Giri
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Abdul Samad
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.
Heard Sri Abdul Samad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Veer Raghav Chaubey, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the entire record.
In view of the order, which is proposed to be passed today, notice to opposite party No.2 is hereby dispensed with.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing the charge sheet No.61-B of 2019 dated 30.10.2019 in Case Crime No.29 of 2019, under Sections 307, 120B I.P.C., Police Station Fursatganj, District Amethi as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.760 of 2019 (State vs. Ravi Singh and others) arising out of F.I.R. No.29 of 2019, under Sections 307, 120B I.P.C., Police Station Fursatganj, District Amethi, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/ F.T.C. (S.D.), Raebareli.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a first information report came to be lodged on the basis of false and fabricated facts. The accused/ applicant is not named in the first information report. The accused/ applicant happens to be Medical Officer in-charge of the Community Heath Centre where the first informant also posted and he did not vacate the house allocated to him for a long period.
His further submission is that the case of of the instant first information report appears to be notice issued by the present applicant to the opposite party No.2. Annoyed because of the notice issued to him, the first informant lodged the instant false first information report.
Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court to the fact that there was no firearm injury sustained by the first informant, therefore, the medical reports available at pages No.106 and 108 to the instant application do not record any injury of firearm. He, thus, submits that the aforesaid facts itself belie the prosecution story and they amply show that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case.
Learned counsel for the applicant, on the basis of aforesaid submissions, has submitted that the present proceeding is nothing but an abuse of process of this Court and a malicious prosecution too, which deserves to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently submitted that the law of quashing has been fairly settled in the celebrated judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 and R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866.
His further submission is that in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramveer Upadhyay vs. State of U.P. reported in AIR 2022 SC 2044 and Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 513, truthfulness or otherwise of the prosecution version or defence version cannot be looked into at this stage. At such an early stage to rush of this Court for quashing itself is an abuse of process of this Court as the trial has not progressed substantially.
Thus, in view of aforesaid, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record including the first information report and the charge sheet laid against the present applicant, this Court is of considered view that in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bhajan Lal's case (supra), R.P. Kapur's case (supra), Ramveer Upadhyay's case (supra) and Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan's case (supra), no ground for quashing the instant proceeding exists.
Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the impugned charge sheet as well as entire proceeding is refused as this Court does not find any illegality, impropriety and incorrectness in the proceedings under challenge. There is no abuse of court's process either.
However, it is needless to mention that the accused/ applicant shall be at liberty to seek appropriate remedy by filing an application for anticipatory bail/ bail before the concerned court below, which shall be considered and decided with utmost expedition by the learned court below by means of reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant application is finally disposed of.
(Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.)
Order Date :- 4.4.2023
cks/-
