Uttarakhand High Court
Sitaram Alais Vishal And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 24 May, 2018
Author: V.K. Bist
Bench: V.K. Bist
C482 No.839 of 2018 Hon'ble V.K. Bist, J.
Mr. Narendra Bali, Advocate for the applicants.
Mr. V.K. Gemini, Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
This C482 petition has been filed by the applicants for quashing the charge sheet and summoning order dated 04.07.2016 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Haridwar, District Haridwar in Criminal Case No.528 of 2016, under Sections 147, 149, 323, 353, 341 436, 336 of IPC and 3 Prevention of Public Property Act, P.S. Pathri, District Haridwar pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Haridwar, District Haridwar.
The FIR was lodged by respondent no.2 stating therein that on the road from Katarpur to Bahadurpur Jat a tractor owner hit a child. The child was died on the spot. The people on the spot got agitated and started beating the person, who sat on the tractor by kicks and fists. In between the Police personnel tried to pacify the agitated people but they could not pacify. The Police personnel freed the person, who was being beaten, and took him in safe place but one Lakhan alongwith 20-25 persons attacked the Police personnel and started pelting stones on the Government vehicle and damaged the Government property. The matter was investigated and the Investigating Officer submitted charge sheet against the applicants. The learned Magistrate took cognizance and passed summoning order against the applicants.
It is contended by the counsel for the applicants that the applicants have falsely been implicated in the instant case. It is stated that in the FIR more than 30-35 persons were present but the charge sheet has been submitted only against six persons. It is further contended that the criminal proceedings against the applicants is gross misuse of process of law which need to be immediately curtailed by this Court.
I have seen the order passed by the lower court and perused the record. It is not a case where trial court has not exercised its jurisdiction in lawful manner. It is settled law that proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. only in rare cases where abuse of process of law is found. In this case after proper investigation charge sheet was filed, the Magistrate after accepting the charge sheet issued summoning order. This is not a case where High Court should intervene under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The C482 petition is dismissed.
Learned counsel for the applicants then prayed that the applicants will surrender before the Court concerned and will move the bail application and the Court concerned may be directed to decide their bail application same day. In my view, every bail application should be considered and decided by the learned Court below without any unreasonable delay. Needless to say that it should be decided strictly in accordance with law. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the applicants, it is observed that in case applicants move bail application, the same shall be decided by the concerned Court expeditiously, preferably on the same day, in accordance with law.
(V.K. Bist, J.) 24.05.2018 Arti