Allahabad High Court
Bhola Sonkar And 16 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 February, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:19168
Court No. - 92
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 909 of 2024
Applicant :- Bhola Sonkar And 16 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri Sandeep Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Shashi Dhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants praying for quashing charge sheet dated 29.5.2019, summoning and bailable order dated 20.10.2023 in Case No.6968 of 2019 (State vs. Ajay Sonkar and others) arising out of Case Crime No.88 of 2019, under Sections 147, 188, 352, 353, 504 IPC and under Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Kotwali Shahar, District-Mirzapur pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur.
3. An FIR was lodged 25.4.2019 by O.P. no.2/informant(Sub Inspector) against 17 named accused (present applicants) and 50 unknown persons. As per FIR, on 25.4.2019, when the informant was on election duty, he was informed by Inspector In-Charge that one boy had drowned in river Ganga at Oliyar Ghat. While the informant went to the place where the boy had drowned and was trying to find out his body with the help of divers, he received an information that the traffic at Oliyar Ghat Crossing was put to halt by 14 named and 50 unknown persons, who were raising slogans. When the informant reached on the spot and asked those people to co-opearate and allow him to clear the traffic jam, some of them started pushing and shoving the police personnel, used filthy language against them and also attacked them, resulting in absolute turmoil at that place.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the names of the applicants had falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicants had never committed any offence as alleged against them. Further submission is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the application and contends that the applicants are named in the FIR and there is serious allegation against them of obstructing the police personnel in commission of their duty. The act of the applicants, as alleged in the FIR, itself speaks about their conduct and goes to show that they are ignorant, irresponsible as well as fearless anti-social persons, who did not even think twice before attacking the police and putting the general public to suffer by creating chaos at a public place. Hence, they do not deserve any kind of leniency by this Court. It is further submitted that the Court below has rightly summoned the applicants and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings.
6. 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.
7. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 has laid down the guidelines under which circumstances the Court should, in its inherent power, entertain an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The guidelines are as follows:-
"(i) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are 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.
(ii) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.
(iii) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.
(iv) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.
(v) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(vi) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(vii) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides and/or where the proceeding is 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."
8. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the 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 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 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
9. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicants. It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not.
10. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 5.2.2024
Manish Himwan
