Allahabad High Court
Ashish Kumar Singh @ Babloo Patel And 5 ... vs State Of Up And Anr on 2 January, 2020
Author: Ali Zamin
Bench: Ali Zamin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46745 of 2019 Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Singh @ Babloo Patel And 5 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Pandey,Narendra Narayan Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet No.115 of 2019 dated 12.7.2019, cognizance order and summoning order dated 09.09.2019 and entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.1759 of 2019 (State vs. Babloo Patel and others) arising out of Case Crime No.121 of 2019, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 and 452 IPC, Police Station-Haliya, District-Mirzapur, pending in the Court of II Additional chief Judicial Magistrate Mirzapur.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that as per F.I.R. the Truck No.U.P. 67 AT 2895, Truck No.U.P. 67 AT 2883 and Truck No. U.P. 61 AT 9230 were caught and seized by opposite party No.2 loading illegal sand and concrete (Gitti) and seizer was sent to the court concerned. Being annoyed with the same, applicants committed Marpit with Uma Shanker and opposite party No.2/ Shailendra Babu, but applicants have no concern with the alleged trucks. He has further submitted that opposite party No.2 wanted extortion money from every vehicle passing through the way, for which applicants and other local inhabitant made a complaint against the opposite party No.2 to the Superior officer, therefore, opposite party No.2 has falsely implicated the applicants in this case. It has been next submitted that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. At last he submitted that the applicant is ready to appear before the court and to face the trial. He sought some time to surrender before the court below.
Learned A.G.A. submits that complaint has been filed against the applicants. He further submits that an employee of the forest department Uma Shanker was beaten by the applicants and medical report also corroborates the prosecution case. It has also been submitted that after investigation, charge sheet has been submitted so, it cannot be said to be a malicious prosecution. It is to be decided by the court concerned after adducing the evidence by the parties.
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 submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within thirty days from today and apply for bail, then their bail applications of the applicants be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of thirty days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them .
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 2.1.2020 Pr/-