Allahabad High Court
Farah Faiz vs State Of U.P. And Another on 17 May, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:89640
Court No. - 91
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9465 of 2021
Applicant :- Farah Faiz
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Mayank,Abhishek Srivastava,Ravindra Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri Abhishek Mayank, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.K. Chandraul, 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 applicant praying for quashing charge sheet dated 10.09.2010 in Case No.1631 of 2020 arising out of Case Crime No.286 of 2010 (State vs. Zindi and others) under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station-Sadar Bazar, District-Sadar Bazar, District-Saharanpur pending in the Court of C.J.M. Saharanpur.
3. In the instant matter, an FIR was lodged by one Ashok Kumar Jain (now deceased) against fifteen named accused persons including the present applicant. As per FIR, on 06.01.1950, 184 bigha 5 biswa land was gifted to J.V. Jain Degree College by one Late Pradyuman Kumar Jain by way of registered gift deed executed in favour of the then Secretary, Committee of Management of the College, and since then the Committee of Management is in the possession of the land. Thereafter, the name of J.V. Jain Degree College was got mutated in the revenue records. Apart from this, on 17.02.1972 Late Pradyumam Kumar Jain again gifted some portion of land of Plot Nos.276 to 281, khesra no.401 area 1 bigha 16 biswa, which was later on renumbered as Khesra no.401/01 and 401/2. After passage of time, the land became valuable and accused no.2 (applicant herein) and 3, who were involved in property business in connivance with accused no.1 filed a civil suit seeking permanent injunction over the land in dispute, which was dismissed. Later on, in connivance with the patwari, they illegally got the name of father-in-law of accused no.1 mutated in the revenue record in respect of the land, which belonged to Committee of Management, J.V. Jain Degree College. Thereafter, accused no.2 on the basis of power of attorney dated 13.03.2002 executed in her favour by accused no.1, sold the land in dispute to co-accused persons by way of sale deed executed on 25.02.2010.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations made in the FIR are totally false and frivolous. He submits that civil dispute is already going on between the parties and the prosecution has tried to give criminal colour to the civil dispute. He further submits that the applicant has never committed any offence as alleged against him. Further submission is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider as no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently oppose the application and contends that the Court below has rightly summoned the applicant 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 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.
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 applicant. 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 :- 17.5.2024
Manish Himwan
