Allahabad High Court
Smt. Prema Devi @ Kevli And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 17 January, 2020
Author: Harsh Kumar
Bench: Harsh Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 82 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2086 of 2020 Applicant :- Smt. Prema Devi @ Kevli And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Raj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 12.03.2016 as well as cognizance order dated 06.12.2016 passed by C.J.M., Kaushambi in Case No. 7097 of 2019, arsing out of Case Crime No. 78 of 2016, under Sections 406, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., at P.S. Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi.
Learned counsel for the applicants contends that applicants have been falsely implicated in the F.I.R. lodged by opposite party no.2 through application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.; that as per averments made in F.I.R. a sum of Rs.20,000/- was taken by opposite party no.2, no money is alleged to have been received by applicant no.1; that the second incident of marpeet inside the house of the first informant has not been supported by alleged eye witnesses; that I.O. has submitted charge sheet without proper investigation and learned Magistrate has acted wrongly and taken cognizance is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that applicants have committed breach of trust and usurp money of 70 years old first informant and upon payment committed marpeet with him; that the eye witnesses have supported the allegations of marpeet; that there is sufficient ground for taken cognizance against applicants.
From the perusal of the 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 relate to the disputed questions of fact, which require evidence and 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 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, and the applicants have failed to prove any prima facie case.
In view of discussions made above, I have come to the conclusion that learned counsel for the applicants have failed to show that there is any abuse of process of court or likelihood of miscarriage of justice for prevention of which the exercise of inherent powers by this Court is required. The application is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.
The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly dismissed.
However, if the applicants appear before the court below and move application for bail, the same shall be disposed of expeditiously in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 17.1.2020 Md Faisal