Pankaj Maheshwari vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 905 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Pankaj Maheshwari vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 May, 2025

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78033
 

 
Court No. - 87
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 5228 of 2025
 

 
Applicant :- Pankaj Maheshwari
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Pathak,Harshit Pathak
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Anurag Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jyoti Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record.

2. The present application has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing charge sheet dated 25-02-2021, cognizance order dated 11-05-2021 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 943 of 2021, arising out of case crime no. 06 of 2021, under Section 304-A IPC, P.S. Bharatkoop, district Chitrakoot.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present criminal proceedings are wholly unwarranted and have been initiated without any substantive basis in evidence. It is contended that while the prosecution initially alleged that the deceased died in a road accident caused by a rashly and negligently driven truck, the depositions of the informant, the alleged eye-witness Siromani, and other witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (now Section 180 of the B.N.S.S.) clearly contradict this version and unanimously state that the deceased died due to an accidental fall from a cliff while working at a site that was leased to the applicant. Despite the absence of any allegation, material evidence, or prima facie case against the applicant, the Investigating Officer, in a mechanical and arbitrary manner, proceeded to submit a charge-sheet under Section 304-A of the I.P.C., blatantly disregarding the evidence on record. Thereafter, the learned court below took cognizance on 11.05.2021. By means of the instant application, the applicant has challenged the said charge-sheet, the order of cognizance, and the entire proceedings. It is further submitted that the applicant is innocent, no offence is made out against him, and the learned Magistrate failed to appreciate that no prima facie case is established warranting prosecution of the applicant.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the application and submitted that there is clear evidence indicating that an accident resulting in the death of the husband of opposite party no. 2 occurred within the premises of the applicant. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure the safety and security of the workers engaged at the site. From a perusal of the F.I.R. and other materials on record, it cannot be conclusively said that no prima facie case exists against the applicant. The court below has rightly taken cognizance in accordance with law, and no interference is warranted by this Hon?ble Court in the impugned order or the ongoing criminal proceedings.

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 in the instant application. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court.

6. 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."

7. 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 the instant application.

8. 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.

9. Hence, the instant application cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 13.5.2025

pks