Allahabad High Court
Mathura And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 January, 2021
Author: Ajit Singh
Bench: Ajit Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 90 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20162 of 2020 Applicant :- Mathura And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- M J Akhtar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 08.04.2008 as well as cognizance order dated 06.07.2010 and the entire proceeding of Case No.851 of 2010, State Vs. Kapil Muni and others, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Ahirauli Bazaar, district Kushinangar, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasya, district Kushinagar arising out of Case Crime No.78 of 2008.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has submitted that the impugned order is totally perfect and valid and there is no illegality in the impugned order.
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 submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court 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. Moreover, the applicants have got right of discharge under Sections 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be through a proper application for the said purpose and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the Trial Court.
The Apex Court in the case of State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh [(1977) 4 SCC 39] has held that when charge sheet has been submitted and it has been challenged by way of application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the High Court, the High Court is not in a position to weight probabilities and re-appreciating the material, if High Court does it, it may be time consuming exercise and the legislative policy of expeditious disposal will hamper. At this stage, this Court is not in a position to weight the factual matrix of the case properly. After having very carefully examined, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material brought on record, the application does not show any abuse of process, which could be remedied by this Court. I find that there is no justification for quashing the impugned order as well as charge-sheet of the aforementioned case.
The accused has a right against charge sheet to file a discharge application before the trial court, the accused will file a discharge application before the trial court within a period of three weeks from today and the trial court shall decide the discharge application within a period of eight weeks thereafter.
Till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
With the aforesaid direction, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 13.1.2021 R./