Allahabad High Court
Dinesh Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 February, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:18974
Court No. - 92
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2332 of 2024
Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shashidhar Pandey, learned AGA for the State.
2. By means of instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the applicants have prayed for quashing the cognizance order dated 01.12.2023 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.28931 of 2023 (State Vs. Dinesh Kumar), arising out of Case Crime No.02 of 2023, under Section 354(C), 427 IPC and Section 67 of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, Police Station Baghawala, District Etah, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.17, Etah.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He further submits that the applicant has denied to marry with the opposite party no.2, thereafter, the present proceeding has been initiated against him. He further submits that the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the opposite party no.2 has not supported the prosecution version.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the present application and contended that the applicant defamed the opposite party no.2 by making her photographs viral on social media. He further submits that the Court below has rightly summoned the applicant and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned summoning order and the proceedings of the trial case.
5. 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 applicant. 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 M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, 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 applicant has got a right of discharge before the court below and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.
6. The prayer for quashing the N.B.W. and the entire proceedings of the above mentioned case is hereby refused.
7. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that directions may be given to the court below to consider the bail application of the applicant in view of the judgment in the matter of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922.
8. 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, the trial court shall definitely follow the directions given in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra).
9. However, considering the nature of the allegations and submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court concerned and applies for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra).
10. With the above directions, this application u/s 482 is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 2.2.2024
S.P.
