Allahabad High Court
Raj Kumar Tyagi And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 14 February, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16959 of 2017
Applicant :- Raj Kumar Tyagi And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- R.P.S. Chauhan,Rajesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijesh Kumar Pandey,Grijesh Kumar
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material available on record.
This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 4.2.2017 and the cognizance taking order dated 02.3.2017 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST Act, Agra in Case crime No. 904/2016 under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)10 SC/ST Act, police station New Agra, district Agra. .
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar 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, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of case and charge sheet as well as summoning order is refused.
At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that directions may be given to the court below to consider the bail application of the applicants in view of the judgment in the case Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922.
In the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the guidelines for deciding of the bail application. For that purpose, the cases have been divided under four categories. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the trial courts and the High Courts will keep in mind the aforesaid guidelines, while considering the bail application. This Court has no doubt, that as and when, the applicants approach the trial court for bail through counsel, same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the court below in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra).
In view of the aforesaid, the present application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 14.2.2023
Krishna*
