Allahabad High Court
Badri Prasad And 7 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another 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. - 12749 of 2020 Applicant :- Badri Prasad And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., R. N. Yadav Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of case no. 1524/2020 arising out of case crime no. 0138/2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 308, 504, 506 IPC, police station Sarai Khwaja, district Jaunpur as well as charge-sheet dated 28.06.2020 and cognizance order dated 03.07.2020 passed in the aforesaid case.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. It was submitted that in the alleged incident, both sides have sustained injuries and that from the side of applicants, four persons have sustained injuries and that a non-cognizable report was lodged by applicant no. 1 Badri Prasad against husband of complainant and some other persons. It was further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the applicants and that no serious injury have been sustained by any of the injured. It has further been argued that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 have opposed the application and argued that in the alleged incident, three persons have sustained several injuries. It was pointed out that in view of nature of injuries, it is apparent that injured persons were assaulted mercilessly. It was further submitted that injured Sudama Devi has suffered fracture of proximal phalanx of index finger and fracture of second metacarpal bone.
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 judgement 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.
The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant(s) 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 mala fide 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 charge-sheet 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 Cr.P.C. 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(s), on the basis of which the impugned charge-sheet 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, 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. The inherent power can not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. Such powers have to be exercised only to give effect to any order under Cr.P.C. or 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 as made above, is hereby refused.
However, keeping in view the facts of the matter and also considering impact of COVID-19 Pandemic, it is directed that if applicants appear and surrender before the Court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, then their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with settled law. For a period of 30 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 such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant(s).
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 Anand