Allahabad High Court
Gudiya Devi And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 26 July, 2023
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:148957
Court No. - 88
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24561 of 2023
Applicant :- Gudiya Devi And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party no.1 and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the charge-sheet dated 17.06.2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 86 of 2022, cognizance/summoning order dated 27.02.2023 and proceedings of Criminal Case No. 11788 of 2023 (State Vs. Nathuni Bind), under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station Jangipur, District Ghazipur pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Ghazipur.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant no. 2 Nathuni Bind lodged first information report on 07.05.2021 at Case Crime No. 81 of 2021, police station Jangipur, district Ghazipur against Golu Kashyap and opposite party no. 2 Vijayi Kashyap, in which after culmination of investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted against them and they are facing trial. So far as this case is concerned, it is submitted that opposite party no. 2, in order to mount pressure upon the applicants, lodged the first information report on 06.05.2022 at Case Crime No. 86 of 2022, police station Jangipur, district Ghazipur under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC on the false fact, in which Investigating Officer, without conducting fair investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the applicants, on which, the applicants have been illegally summoned vide order dated 27.02.2023, therefore, impugned charge-sheet and summoning order dated 27.02.2023 are liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State refuting the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicants submitted that upon perusal of F.I.R. and on the basis of the allegations made therein as well as material against the applicants, as per prosecution case, the cognizable offence against the applicants is made out. The criminal proceedings against the applicants cannot said to be abuse of the process of the Court. Hence this application is liable to be dismissed.
Having examined the matter in its totality, I find that in the F.I.R., allegation of causing injury to the daughter-in-law of opposite party no. 2 has been levelled against the applicants. During investigation, medical examination report has been collected by the Investigating Officer and statement of Medical Officer was also recorded as mentioned in the charge-sheet. The summoning order dated 27.02.2023 also reflects that learned Magistrate took cognizance considering the facts and material filed alongwith charge-sheet after applying his judicial mind. The grounds taken in the application reveal that many of them relate to disputed question of fact. This Court is of that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is well settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sparingly, only in such an appropriate cases, where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceedings or where allegations made in First Information Report or charge-sheet and the materials relied in support of same, on taking their face value and accepting in their entirety do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage, which can be more appropriately gone into by the trial court at the appropriate stage.
At the stage of taking cognizance of the case and summoning the accused, the court below is not required to go into the merit and demerit of the case. Genuineness or otherwise of the allegations cannot be even determined at the stage of summoning the accused.
This Court does not find that this case fall in a categories as recognized by the Apex Court for quashing the criminal proceeding of the trial Court at pre-trial stage. Considering the facts, circumstances and nature of allegations against the applicants in this case, the cognizable offence is made out. At this stage it would not be appropriate to adjudge whether the case shall ultimately end in conviction or not. Only prima facie satisfaction of the Court about the existence of sufficient ground to proceed in the matter is required. The impugned criminal proceeding under the facts of this case cannot be said to be abuse of the process of the Court. There is no good ground to invoke inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by this Court.
The relief as sought by the applicants through the instant application is hereby refused.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.7.2023
Shubham
