Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 4]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Akash Sharma (Dhamole) vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 August, 2023

Author: Sunita Yadav

Bench: Sunita Yadav

                                                                               1

                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT GWALIOR
                                                                         BEFORE
                                              HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
                                                       ON THE 1st OF AUGUST, 2023
                                              MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No.23771 of 2023

                                   BETWEEN:-

                                    AKASH SHARMA (DHAMOLE) S/O SHRI
                                    RAJENDRA PRASAD SHARMA, AGED
                                    ABOUT    22  YEARS,  OCCUPATION:
                                    STUDENT, R/O VILLAGE BARHAD,
                                    POLICE STATION MEHGAON, DISTRICT
                                    BHIND (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                                                                         ........PETITIONER

                                   (BY SHRI               MUKESH             SHARMA             -
                                   ADVOCATE)

                                   AND
                                    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                    THROUGH POLICE STATION GOHAD
                                    CHAURAHA, DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
                                    PRADESH)
                                                                                                      ........RESPONDENTS

                                    (BY MS. ANKITA MATHUR - PUBLIC
                                    PROSECUTOR)
                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
                           ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       ORDER

By invoking inherent power of this Court, present petition has been preferred by petitioner u/S.482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of FIR bearing Crime No.12 of 2023 registered at Police Station Gohad Chauraha, District Bhind (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIPIN KUMAR AGRAHARI Signing time: 04-08-2023 06:03:18 PM 2 Sections 8, 21 & 29 of NDPS Act and other subsequent criminal proceedings initiated therefrom.

2. The necessary facts for disposal of present petition in short are that on 17.01.2023 during patrolling, Sub-inspector Kalyan Singh Yadav, Police Station Gohad Chauraha had received discrete information from the informant that a person is carrying illegal contraband on a black colour Splendor motor-cycle bearing registration No.MP-07-NJ-7469. Acting upon said information, Sub-inspector Kalyan Singh Yadav alongwith his staff reached the Gwalior Bhind Highway and started checking the vehicles and during checking, aforesaid motor-cycle was intercepted. The two persons who were sitting on the motor-cycle tried to fled away after leaving the motor- cycle, but they were apprehended with the help of other accompanying staff and during search 13.11 grams of smack has been recovered from their possession. In their statement recorded under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act, they deposed that the alleged contraband has been purchased by them in the sum of Rs.1,30,000/- from the present petitioner. On the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused persons, the present petitioner has been arrayed as accused and case u/Ss.8, 21, 29 of NDPS Act has been registered against him by the concerned police.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present matter. It is further submitted that the petitioner was neither present on the spot, nor any contraband has been recovered from his possession. The complicity of the petitioner is alleged only on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused persons namely, Sanju Jatav and Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIPIN KUMAR AGRAHARI Signing time: 04-08-2023 06:03:18 PM 3 Rahul Gour recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Prima facie, there is no evidence available against the petitioner. It is further argued that the name of petitioner is not mentioned in the FIR. Petitioner has no criminal antecedents. There is material lacuna in the seizure of contraband, therefore, the FIR is liable to be quashed in respect to present petitioner.

4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashment of FIR. It is submitted that the name of petitioner is mentioned in the FIR. The petitioner is having criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that investigation is still going on in respect to present petitioner u/S.173(8) of Cr.P.C., therefore, evidence is still to be collected against the petitioner to connect him with the crime. Further argument is that at this stage the evidence cannot be interpreted in respect to lacuna while seizing the contraband. Under such circumstances, the petition has no substance and it be dismissed.

5. Heard counsel for the parties at length and perused the record the material available on record.

6. Though it is a fact that section 482 of Cr.P.C. has given wide power to the High court, however, it should not be applied in random, but to use sparingly. Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been incorporated to prevent abuse of process of law and not to encourage the offence.

7. From perusal of case diary, it reveals that in FIR the name of Rahul Gour is specifically mentioned as supplier of contraband. The petitioner has also criminal antecedents. Investigation is still going on against the present petitioner and evidence is yet to be collected.

8. The Apex Court in the case of Ramveer Upadhyay and Anr. Vs. Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIPIN KUMAR AGRAHARI Signing time: 04-08-2023 06:03:18 PM 4 State of U.P. & Anr. passed in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.2953 of 2022 has held as under:-

'.....Whether the allegations are true or untrue, would have to be decided in the trial. In exercise of power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the Court does not examine the correctness of the allegations in a complaint except in exceptionally rare cases where it is patently clear that the allegations are frivolous or do not disclose any offence. ....'

9. Thus, it is crystal clear that Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been incorporated to prevent abuse of process of law and not to encourage the offence. This Court cannot make roaming enquiry at this stage but if controverted allegations do not make any offence only then this court can quash the FIR. Therefore, this Court is of considered view that it is not a fit case wherein, this Court can exercise power under section 482 of Cr.P.C.

10. Accordingly, present petition preferred under section 482 of Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed.

(SUNITA YADAV ) JUDGE Vpn/-

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIPIN KUMAR AGRAHARI Signing time: 04-08-2023 06:03:18 PM