Allahabad High Court
Om Prakash And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Antoher on 1 October, 2020
Author: Raj Beer Singh
Bench: Raj Beer Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12663 of 2020 Applicant :- Om Prakash And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Antoher Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Dhar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Certified copy of the notice issued under Section 111, 151, 107, 116 Cr.P.C. has been produced by learned counsel for the applicants today in the Court which is taken on record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 12.10.2019 in Criminal Case No. 2433 of 2020 (State Vs. Om Prakash) Case Crime No. 51 of 2019 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354 I.P.C. Poplice Station Dharamsinghwa, District Sant Kabir Nagar pending before the Court of Civil Judge, (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, District Sant Kabir Nagar and also to quash the summoning order dated 19.06.2020 passed in aforesaid case.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the instant case and that F.I.R. of the impugned case has been lodged on false and baseless allegations. In fact, regarding alleged incident, proceedings under Sections 107, 116 Cr.P.C. were initiated between the parties but later on, F.I.R. was lodged making false and baseless allegations and that charge sheet was submitted in a routine manner. It was submitted that both the parties are members of same family and that applicant nos. 1 and 2 are real brothers. It was further stated that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants and therefore, the impugned charge sheet as well as summoning order are liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A., has opposed the application and argued that allegations made in the F.I.R. makes out a prima facie case against the applicants. It was further submitted that prima facie offence is disclosed against the applicants, hence the impugned proceedings and summoning order are not liable to be quashed.
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, 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.
In the instant matter, the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court and even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the material on record it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceeding are manifestly attended with malafide and 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.
After considering arguments raised by the learned counsel for parties and perusing the impugned complaint and the materials in support of the same, this Court does not find it to be a case which can be determined or gone into in an application under Section 482 CrPC. This Court cannot hold a parallel trial in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No such ground appears to be available to the applicant, on the basis of which the impugned complaint can be quashed going by the settled law in 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 Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.
Similarly so far as the impugned summoning order is concerned, perusal of material on record shows that the impugned order has been passed by applying due procedure and no substantial illegality, perversity or any other substantial error could be pointed out. It is well settled that the power under section 482 Cr.P.C has to be exercised by the High Court, interalia, 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 CrPC are very wide but the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. The inherent power cannot be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. 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. In the instant case no case for quashing of impugned order is made out.
Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the impugned charge sheet as well as summoning order is refused.
However, keeping in view the facts of the matter and impact of Covid-19 Pandemic, it is directed that in case applicants appear and surrender before the Court below within a period of 45 days from today and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with settled law. For a period of 45 days from today or till the applicants surrender before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
The party may file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicants.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
With the aforesaid direction, the application is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 1.10.2020 S.Ali