Sumit vs State Of U.P. And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 19607 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Sumit vs State Of U.P. And Another on 29 May, 2024

Author: Gautam Chowdhary

Bench: Gautam Chowdhary

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:98029
 
Court No. - 90
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22642 of 2016
 

 
Applicant :- Sumit
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Sharma,Atul Sharma
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mayank Yadav,Vivek Kumar Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
 

1. Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant today in the Court is taken on record.

2. By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has sought for quashing of the proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 539 of 2015 (State Vs. Sumit) under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat pending in the Court of Ist Additional District Judge, Baghpat.

3. The facts giving rise to the instant application are that a first information report was lodged by the informant namely, Devendra Kumar with the averments that on 19/20.06.2015 in the night at about 02:30 he was sleeping on the roof of his house on hearing shrieks, he came down and the applicant seeing him ran away. His daughter, aged about 16 years, told him that the applicant had committed rape on her and had threatened to kill her and her family. Upon aforesaid averments, a first information report was lodged by the informant in Case Crime No. 0539 of 2015 under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, at Police Station Badaut, District Baghpat. The matter was entrusted for investigation and after recording of the statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. charge sheet was submitted on 07.07.2015 upon which, cognizance was taken on 17.07.2015 and the case was registered as Sessions Trial No. 33 of 2015 (State Vs. Sumit) arising out of Case Crime No. 0539 of 2015 under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Badaut, District Baghpat. It is these proceedings which are under challenge before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after registration of the case against the applicant, the applicant was arrested by the police on 22.06.2015 and thereafter, the applicant was enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 17.08.2015 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 29518 of 2015, copy of which order is annexed as Annexure-7 to the affidavit accompanying the instant application. Learned counsel further argued that the instant prosecution is a malicious prosecution launched against the applicant and in this regard, he has drawn attention of this Court to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. copy of which, is annexed as Annexure-5 to the affidavit accompanying the instant application, wherein she has specifically stated that the applicant resides in front of her house and two year ago quarrel took place between the parties in which, her father had sustained head injury and only to wreak vengeance, had lodged the applicant in jail. She has specifically denied any occurrence with her committed by the applicant. The extract of statement of the victim reads as under:-

"??????? X ?? ???????? ??? ?? ??? ???? ??- ????? ???? ?? ?? ????? ???? ??? ?? ??? ???? ????? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ?? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??? ??? ??? ?? ?? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????? ?? ??? ??? ???? ????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???"

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the Investigating Officer, without collecting credible evidence and without considering the factual aspect of the matter, has submitted the charge sheet against the applicant in a routine manner, upon which the learned Ist Additional District and Sessions Judge, Baghpat without applying his judicial mind and without perusing the case diary as well as statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in correct perspective, vide order dated 17.07.2015 had taken cognizance against the applicant. Learned counsel further argued that perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. shows that no offence is made out against the applicant. Apart from the same, learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the victim has been married and is mother of two children, as has been averred in paragraph no. 9 of the rejoinder affidavit whereas, the applicant has been victimised on false accusation and therefore the entire proceedings are liable to be quashed by this Court.

6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the application and has stated that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has specifically stated that the applicant had committed rape on her and therefore, there is no illegality or perversity in submission of charge sheet as well as cognizance order passed against the applicant, thus the instant application is liable to be dismissed in the interest of justice.

7. Heard Sri Atul Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

8. Perusal of the material on record shows that the F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant under the charged Sections, in which after investigation charge sheet was filed against the applicant. The statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. shows that no offence has been committed by the applicant and that the applicant has been falsely implicated due to animosity between the parties thus the criminal proceedings initiated by the informant in the facts of the present case was malafide and has been falsely initiated against the applicant. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Vineet Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in AIR 2017 SCC 1884 has held that in paragraph no. 39 as under:-

39. Inherent power given to the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is with the purpose and object of advancement of justice. In case solemn process of Court is sought to be abused by a person with some oblique motive, the Court has to thwart the attempt at the very threshold. The Court cannot permit a prosecution to go on, if the case falls in one of the categories as illustratively enumerated by this Court in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal. Judicial process is a solemn proceeding which cannot be allowed to be converted into an instrument of operation or harassment. When there are material to indicate that a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide and proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive, the HIgh Court will not hesitate in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceeding under Category 7 as enumerated in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal (AIR 1992 SC 604) which is to the following effect.

"(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide 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"

9. The legal position on the issue of quashing of 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 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 may be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. In well celebrated judgment reported in AIR 1992 SC 605 State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal, Hon'ble 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 rarest of rare cases. It is well settled that the power under section 482 Cr.P.C has to be exercised by the High Court, inter alia, to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Though the powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C are very wide but the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. Such powers have to be exercised only to give effect to any order under Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of the process of any court and to secure the ends of justice.

10. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that to prevent the abuse of process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, the powers vested with the Court be exercised. The victim did not level any allegation against the applicant in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and she has unequivocally denied of any offence having been committed with her. She has been married and is living with her family whereas, the applicant is facing false accusation. Thus this Court is of the opinion, that false accusation of the innocent person be not permitted to go on and it is a fit case to exercise powers conferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the instant case clearly falls under category-7 enumerated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal (supra).

11. In view of above, the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 539 of 2015 (State Vs. Sumit) under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat pending in the Court of Ist Additional District Judge, Baghpat as against the applicant is quashed.

12. Accordingly, the instant application is allowed.

Order Date :- 29.5.2024

S.Ali