Allahabad High Court
Rita Devi And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 10 December, 2019
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 81 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43688 of 2019 Applicant :- Rita Devi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet no. 01 of 2019 dated 04.06.2019 as well as cognizance order dated 01.08.2019 and entire criminal proceedings in Criminal Case NO.932 of 2019 (State vs. Rita Devi and others) arising out Case Crime NO.69 of 2019 under section 419, 420, 467, 468 IPC, Police station Jaitpura, District Varanasi pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.4, Varanasi and also a prayer is made to stay the proceedings in this case till the disposal of this application.
According to prosecution case, the husband of the informant/opposite party no.2 was the owner of 1/3rd portion of Araji no. 69/2, area 0.1260 hectares, out of which 2415 sq. feet was sold by her husband on 14.6.2007 to accused-applicant no.1 Rita Devi, where-after Rita Devi has sold the said land through three different sale deeds to the applicant no. 2, Sanjai Kumar Tripathi and 2 others. Therefore, the allegation is that the area of the said araji, which belonged to the informant had also been sold by the accused applicant no.1, which was purchased by the applicant no. 2 knowingly that the applicant no.1 was not owner of the piece of land. Hence an offence under sections 419, 420, 467, 468 IPC has been committed by the accused applicant no.1.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the area which has been sold by the accused-applicant no. 1 to applicant no. 2 and others is the area of which, he was owner and not beyond that. It is a false allegation that any portion of the land belonging to the informant has been sold. Therefore, charge sheet has been erroneously submitted against her, which need to be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing the charge-sheet.
After investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer after having recorded statements of as many as four witnesses. The veracity of statements of the witnesses cannot be tested in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. From the evidence on record, it cannot be said that cognizable offence is not made out against the accused-applicant.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604 and State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused.
However, the applicant may approach the trial court to seek discharge at appropriate stage, if so advised, and before the said forum, he may raise all the pleas which have been taken by him here. If such an application is moved, the same shall be disposed of without being influenced by the observation made by this Court.
The applicant shall appear before the court below within 30 days from today and may move an application for bail. If such an application is moved within the said time limit, the same would be disposed of in accordance with law. For a period of 30 days, no coercive action shall be taken against the accused-applicant in the aforesaid case. But if the accused does not appear before the court below, the court below shall take coercive steps to procure his attendance.
With aforesaid direction, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 10.12.2019 AU