Allahabad High Court
Norul Hasan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 January, 2023
Bench: Gautam Chowdhary
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 79
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28697 of 2022
Applicant :- Norul Hasan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ved Prakash Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pranjal Mehrotra
Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
ORDER ON CORRECTION/MODIFICATION APPLICATION NO.01 OF 2022
On 21.09.2022, the following order was passed:-
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Pranjal mahrotra, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the proceedings of Sessions Case No. 1468 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No. 40 of 2020 under Section 135 of Electricity Act, Police Station Anti Power Theft Thana, District Moradabad pending before learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Moradabad as well as to quash the charge sheet dated 4.6.2020 filed in the aforesaid case.
The offence is compoundable. Learned counsel for applicant contended that compounding fees has been deposited and letter has been issued by the concerned authority i.e. Executive Engineer, opposite party no. 2 and nothing remain due against the applicant.
Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 also does not dispute the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the applicant and he does not want to pursue the matter any further.
In view of above, obviously nothing remains due against the applicant, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the application pending.
Consequently, the prayer for quashing the charge sheet in the aforesaid case is allowed.
The charge sheet dated 4.6.2020 as well as entire proceedings are quashed.
Accordingly, the instant application is allowed."
The instant correction/modification application has been filed for correcting the order dated 21.09.2022, whereby paragraph no.3 of the order has been sought to be deleted.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this Court had passed a favourable order on 21.9.2022 but due to mistake paragraph no.3 has been wrongly transcribed and prays to delete the same.
Although the offence is compoundable, perusal of the record shows that the applicant has neither deposited compounding fees nor any letter has been issued by the concerned authority i.e. Executive Engineer, the opposite party no.2 that nothing remains due against the applicant and under the garb of the said contention, the charge sheet dated 04.06.2020 as well as entire proceedings were quashed. In case, paragraph no.3 of the order dated 21.09.2022, is deleted which the very basis for quashing the charge sheet and proceedings of the case yet the counsel for the applicant has sought for deletion of paragraph no.3 of the order dated 21.09.2022.
In view of the aforesaid, the correction application is mis-conceived and is accordingly, rejected. The order dated 21.09.2022 is recalled and in its place the following order is being passed:-
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the proceedings of Sessions Case No. 1468 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No. 40 of 2020 under Section 135 of Electricity Act, Police Station Anti Power Theft Thana, District Moradabad pending before learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Moradabad as well as to quash the charge sheet dated 4.6.2020 filed in the aforesaid case.
Perusal of the record shows that against the demand of Rs. 5,32370/-, the applicant has deposited Rs. 20,430/- and Rs.10,073/- before the Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited), copy of which is annexed as Annexure-7 to the affidavit accompanying the applicant.
The legal position on the issue of quashing criminal proceedings is well settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint/charge sheet and material on record even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the charge-sheet/ complaint may be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.. If a prima facie case is made out disclosing the ingredients of the offence alleged against the accused, the Court cannot quash a criminal proceeding. In well elaborated judgment reported in AIR 1992 SC 605 State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal, Supreme Court has carved out certain guidelines, wherein FIR or proceedings may be quashed but cautioned that the power to quash FIR or proceedings should be exercised sparingly and that too in the rare of rarest cases.
In the instant case, in view of allegations made in the first information report as well as on the basis of material collected during investigation a prima facie case is made out. The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant call for determination of questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court and even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, do not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the material on record, it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceeding are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.
After considering the arguments raised by the learned counsel for parties and perusing the impugned charge sheet and the materials in support of the same, this Court does not find it to be such a case, which can be determined or gone into in an application under Section 482 CrPC. This Court cannot hold a parallel trial in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Considering the material on record and the settled law as laid down in case 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 Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 as well as recent case of Apex Court in Rajeev Kourav V Bhaisahab & Ors (Criminal Appeal No.232 of 2020), decided on 11.02.2020, no case for quashing of impugned charge sheet as well as cognizance order is made out.
Accordingly, the reliefs as sought by the applicant is refused.
The application lacks merits and is dismissed.
The Registrar compliance is directed to communicate the order passed by this Court to the concerned Court below forthwith.
Order Date :- 3.1.2023
S.Ali
